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.

13 Responses to “Quick Gay Marriage Note”

  1. Alex, FCD Says:

    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.

  2. Ron Britton Says:

    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.

  3. The Watcher Says:

    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, Ron), but I really couldn’t give a rat’s ass how many wives you want to have, as long as they’re all consenting.

    Thanks for covering my back 🙂

  4. Mike Says:

    “My point 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.”

    Nobody in a society where gay marriage is not allowed, can legally marry a person of the same sex either, which renders your point moot. It is not an equality issue, if you look at it that way. Since people are allowed to have a wife, why not many, that’s discrimination based on volume rather than quantity.

    Ok, enough with the hair-splitting. The function of marriage in a society’s view is reproduction. A society needs to produce offspring to continue to exist. Based on these premises allowing polygamy would be sensible, allowing gay marriage, not so, what’s the point?

  5. Mike Says:

    *quality (not quantity)

    ..that’s discrimination based on quantity rather than quality. Discrimination nonetheless.

  6. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I am married and have no kids. So, like, should I not receive marriage tax benefits, death benefits, and so on? Should a gay couple that has adopted or (and this is a real shocker) has biological children not be granted those benefits? Your argument makes no sense. Marriage was once used as a contract with the government to encourage offspring through legal benefits. That is no longer the case in modern society. It is now simply a set of legal conveniences and less red tape (and lower taxes) for the single most important person in your life.

  7. Ron Britton Says:

    Nor should we allow post-menopausal women to marry.

  8. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Or women who had hysterectomies, or men who have had orchiectomies, etc…

  9. OtherRob Says:

    I’ve often heard the argument that gays are asking for “special privileges” in wanting same-sex marriage. I even heard a nationally-syndicated radio talk-show host say that gays already have the same marriage rights as straights, the right to marry a person of the opposite sex.

    The counter-argument to that is that gays are not asking for special privileges at all. Straight folk would have just as much right to marry a person of the same sex as a gay person. Just because the choose not to doesn’t mean they aren’t gaining that right.

    As for polygamy/polyandry…my take is that, as long as all of those involved are consenting adults, it’s none of my damn business who you marry or how many of ’em you marry. 🙂

  10. Parrotlover77 Says:

    OtherRob – I’m with you. The slippery slope argument is nonsense. So what if polygamy becomes legally recognized? Who the hell cares?!

    The only hyperbolic statement they make that I agree with is along the lines of “or wanting to marry their dog!” Okay, yes, if somebody started demanding the right to marry a non-human, I would agree that should not be protected. You got me.


    Oh and btw: http://www.marryyourpet.com/

  11. Magic is temptation::::Leads people into deviate lifestyles Says:

    [Deleted by admin for violation of comment policy.]

  12. Mick Says:

    @ Magic is temptation::::Leads people into deviate lifestyles


  13. Syldoran Says: