tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post115397155824308897..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: In The Name of TraditionDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1154009135851498232006-07-27T07:05:00.000-07:002006-07-27T07:05:00.000-07:00The Balkin article seems nifty. Hurray for plural...The Balkin article seems nifty. Hurray for pluralism! <BR/><BR/>On a side-note, I think "Orwellian" as used in political discourse has been totally driven into meaninglessness in the "judicial activism" sense of "this word basically means I think you're wrong". Ironically, it's become the type of stale figurative language Orwell urges us not to use in "Politics and the Enlighish Language".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1153993113821680372006-07-27T02:38:00.000-07:002006-07-27T02:38:00.000-07:00Excellent post -- and I'm glad to see someone else...Excellent post -- and I'm glad to see someone else agrees with my take on Kant.Stentorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13629599671442149938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1153980032581372702006-07-26T23:00:00.000-07:002006-07-26T23:00:00.000-07:00Balkin's way of framing the issue ("traditions are...Balkin's way of framing the issue ("traditions are often contested") is exactly what's needed in today's debates. We simply can't let the right appropriate "tradition," Jesus, the flag, and so on as if there were only one correct interpretation of what the values that flow from them mean. Even if facts and traditions are "real and ascertainable," they won't necessarily cohere or provide a single conclusion when put in a new context. Slavery is a good example of an American tradition that conflicted with (and was eventually overwhelmed by) other traditions like individual rights. It would have made no sense in 1850 to ask which of those traditions was the "real and ascertainable" tradition and which was Orwellian revisionism.<BR/><BR/>Andrew Sullivan has been making the case that marriage for same-sex couples is the best way of supporting marital traditions for a couple decades now. I think he's right; how exactly could gay relationships be "traditional" if marriage <B>wasn't</B> an option for them?Disenchanted Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18420314835376739894noreply@blogger.com