Comments: The slippery slope gets slicker

(We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)


My response: Who cares? It's not my business. When the Netherlands starts to burn and the towns start to crumble, then perhaps that's when they can take it as a sign from "God" and reverse course. But, for now, I think we all need to get over this. It's gonna happen eventually.

Posted by Mike M. at September 29, 2005 05:58 PM

Amen.

Posted by dan at September 29, 2005 07:19 PM

Polyamory and polygamy don't bother me all that much. There are days when I think I'd like a wife, too ;) Someone else can do the dishes and laundry and cook the dinner.

Posted by Bronwen at September 29, 2005 08:46 PM

With regards to the other commentators: exactly. What difference does it make to anyone's life (other than the folks getting hitched) if three people who love each other decide to seek legal sanction (and a solid legal framework) for their relationship?

I say, slide all the way down the "slippery slope" - free and consenting adults should be able to choose how they live together, period. As they have done since the dawn of time, and continue to do so.

Posted by Thomas Leavitt at September 30, 2005 02:18 AM

"I say, slide all the way down the "slippery slope" - free and consenting adults should be able to choose how they live together, period."
That's no slippery slope, that is how it is. Calling it a marriage and granting benefits is what is up for debate.

Posted by mikem at September 30, 2005 10:46 AM

As I've mentioned many times before, I, too, could care less what consenting adults do. I think Felix's point, however, is that those in favor of gay marriage frequently pooh-poohed the notion of polygamist marriage "rights" when people brought it up. (And, dan didn't your favorite senator -- Santorum -- bring up this exact point in so many words? And wasn't he verbally drawn and quartered for it?)

Keep in mind that, as we all seem to agree, if trios, quartets, quintets or whatever are allowed to "marry," then certainly we shouldn't give two hoots if I wish to marry my sister. Or if Billy Bob wants to marry his mother. As long as they are ADULTS, we -- and no one else -- should rightly complain!

One more thing: If trios are eventually allowed to "marry" here in the US, how would their tax breaks work? Wouldn't it be inherently unfair since they could write off more -- since they have more people involved in the "union"? The solution is easy, though: get the government out of the marriage business.

Posted by Hube at September 30, 2005 02:54 PM

But when traditions as deeply rooted in the continuation of a society are uprooted and the slippery slope is allowed to slide, society itself is in jeopardy of collapsing eventually.....does it threaten me.....darn right it does, as it threatens everyone in society....Excuse me, I have to go celebrate wife number 15's birthday and then I am going to go visit the barn!

Posted by schmitt at September 30, 2005 08:22 PM

What difference does it make? None -- except for the fact that others are forced to legally recognize those relationships despite the fact that doing so violates tehir own moral beliefs. It requires employers to subsidize those relationships in the form of spousal benefits. It causes a dramatic shift in tax revenues and government benefits.

In other words, it has a lot of effects on society that have nothing to do with who is screwing who.

Posted by Rhymes With Right at September 30, 2005 10:54 PM

Post a comment









Remember personal info?