Bachman's high school debate style...

When I was a senior in high school, I remember debating a bunch of my Mormon friends about gay marriage. One of them, in what seemed to him like a stroke of rhetorical genius, told me that gays DO have equal rights--they can marry women and can't marry men just like straight people.

In high school, it seemed to me a remarkably ignorant argument and I thought I was done with it. I was wrong. Michele Bachmann has revived it for us all here:

[Gays and lesbians] can get married," Bachmann responded. "But they abide by the same law as everyone else. They can marry a man if they're a woman. Or they can marry a woman if they're a man."

Bachmann later went on to clarify her belief that "there are no special rights for people based upon your sex practices. There's no special rights based upon what you do in your sex life."

I am quoting this here not to debunk a stupid argument, but because I just thought of a new way of looking at it.  Here goes--

If people believe that sexuality is a choice, then heterosexuality is as much a choice as homosexuality. That being said, opposite-sex marriage is a choice, and (using their logic) is based upon the sexual act of opposite-sex, vaginal intercourse.  This means that all the benefits that legally recognized, opposite-sex married couples receive ARE "special rights based upon what you do in your sex life." 

That's right folks--by claiming sexuality IS a choice, and that marriage is simply the "choice" that people who "choose" certain sexual acts enter into, then the benefits one receives are "special" rights.

Whew...now that I've shown how her arguments are woefully self-defeating, I'm sure they'll go away. Because...Bachman has clearly shown that facts and logic when disproving her statements sway her opinion. (<-sarcasm)