--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcg...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > > The "box turtle" statement above is really making the > > > > case against gay marriage by not making the case: It > > > > is not telling you what is wrong with gay marriage, > > > > but rather saying that if you allow gay marriage then > > > > you will have to allow something else you might not like." > > > > > > > > Read more... > > > > http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/29/8452 > > > > http://tinyurl.com/brsdvm > > > > > > That's one way of looking at it; another way is to say > > > that those that support gay marriage and not other > > > kinds of marriage are hypocrites. > > > > Not if same-sex marriage is much more similar to > > opposite-sex marriage than it is to these "other > > kinds of marriage," which it obviously is. > > > > If there were a movement in favor of incestuous > > marriage or polygamy or box-turtle marriage as > > substantial as there is in favor of same-sex > > marriage, you might have a point (although there > > would still be good arguments against it), but > > there isn't. > > > > > I don't know what you mean by "substantial" but I suspect you mean > "significant numbers". Certainly, there are WAY more gays than any of the > other members of groups mentioned. > > But civil rights shouldn't be dependent upon "numbers"; that is, simply > because of the power of voting or influence given by substantial numbers > should not dictate who does and does not get civil rights. > > About a month or two ago I posted an article from a Canadian newspaper > specifically about the slippery slope argument (sorry, I can't remember when > nor do I have the reference or link) regarding gay marriage in Canada where > it's been legal for several years and, yes, there are several movements > afloat to legalize both polygamy and incest. >
My Gawd! Because of the "slippery slope," the next thing you know it will be legal for rocks to marry bananas! Get real, fella. There are already six states that have legalized gay marriage. The other 'marriages' you've mentioned have no actual viable support and no reality of happening. Even the big main Mormon church is against legalizing polygamy.
