Quick Gay Marriage Note
I just read a good mauling of a bigot over at Fundie Watch. The article in question picks apart an especially bad screed by concerned “woman” J. Matt Barber.
Your best bet is to go on over to Fundie Watch and enjoy the bloodshed. The only omission in his article is that he doesn’t call Barbie-Matt on his straw-man argument. In fact, I don’t often hear proponents of marriage equality refuting the marriage slippery-slope argument. I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to it. Here is an excerpt of the comment I left over at Fundie Watch:
We need to push back on these nitwits every time they talk about “The next thing you know, somebody will marry a snake!” That is a straw man. We can’t let them continue to bring that up.
Marriage is NOT on a slippery slope. It is on a staircase.
Ending marriage discrimination now would only have the effect of giving a minority the same rights that the majority already enjoys. Marriage is a civil contract between two people. It’s time to end the discriminatory practice of only allowing heterosexuals to marry.
Polygamy would not and could not be allowed under an extension of the current arguments in favor of gay marriage, for the simple reason that no members of society are currently given that right. Likewise for marrying your favorite sheep.
Incestual marriage is the closest thing to a slippery slope, but because of the inbreeding issue, there is an actual harm to society. This adds an extra burden that gay marriage doesn’t have. The courts usually look at such ramifications, so I think it’s unlikely that a ruling in favor of brother/sister marriage would happen.
June 26th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
And then there’s the fact that, you know, a lot of gay people want to get married, but next to nobody wants to marry his sister.
June 27th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Yeah, I don’t really see the whole “incestuous marriage” thing as a bandwagon that’s gaining speed. Polygamy, though, doesn’t really bother me. I know I’m departing with even some of my readers with that one (possibly even you, Bay), but I really could give a rat’s ass how many wives you want to have, as long as they’re all consenting.
Thanks for covering my back
June 27th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Polygamy has existed successfully for a long time in other cultures without bringing them to collapse. My point in the article is that the arguments in favor of gay marriage don’t work in favor of polygamy, because nobody in our society legally has multiple wives. All the gays want is the same rights that everyone else has. Polygamists already have the same rights as everyone else: The right to marry one other person.
I’d prefer to keep marriage to two people. That already creates enough grief for us all. If it were up to me, we’d all go back to reproducing asexually. If society wants to allow polygamy, then we should have that discussion (write your congressman). Who knows, maybe I’ll change my mind. But if we allow multiple wives, we also have to allow multiple husbands.