I didn’t see it as a sociological question. When I think of a debate, I think of a back and forth between a proponent and an opponent. Not two proponents discussing between themselves what they think opponents are doing. If, for example, you put together a debate on whether creationists believe evolution is taking place today, you try to invite creationists to represent their beliefs. A proponent is better than a straw man. It’s a live debate, not a post-mortem.
My read of Velocity’s post is that the topic for debate is the benefits of being gay, as per conservatives who think being gay is a choice. Not a discussion of polls on whether being gay is a choice, not a discussion on whether Republicans are bigoted or want to hurt gay people. He was asking for the arguments, not polling data. As I wrote in post #1, the thread is in GD, not P&E. To put it another way, he wanted to pick at the conservative perspective to this question: “Why choose gay sex over straight sex?”
And with the exception of a few posts, that is not the debate that actually took place in that thread. This is, of course, just my interpretation. It’s not up to me to say what the topic (or Velocity’s state of mind) actually is.
So.
- I think the thread was mostly derailed.
- I think if I had asked Der_Trihs for cites, it would only have derailed the thread even more.
- I think the topic is not a largely sociological question, and that personal views of specific Dopers (conservative or not) are not only relevant but ideal. Czarcasm and Roderick_Femm made the most relevant posts, in my opinion, and interestingly on opposite sides of the question despite neither being known to me as conservative.
- I didn’t disclaim malice with the expectation that statement would carry any weight, I did it to shut down the argument all conservatives are malicious/argue in bad faith which I felt detracted from the topic and attempted to shut down my argument by insulting me personally.
- I did not segue into my discourse on the conceptual advantages of states’ rights. Not in the linked topic; not even here in ATMB, where I produced links to me expressing that opinion not to discuss it here, but to establish conservative bona fides. See, for example, BigT’s post directly under yours. (BigT, my opinions may diverge from mainstream conservatism in many respects, but not on the particular question of whether the courts were legally correct to protect same-sex marriage, nor of whether being gay is a choice.)
~Max