May 13, 2009

From 2003 to today...a little history on the "slippery slope" argument

I stumbled onto a 2003 article today on the web and found it fascinating. Here's an excerpt from the Weekly Standard:

"...Among the likeliest effects of gay marriage is to take us down a slippery slope to legalized polygamy and "polyamory" (group marriage). Marriage will be transformed into a variety of relationship contracts, linking two, three, or more individuals (however weakly and temporarily) in every conceivable combination of male and female. A scare scenario? Hardly. The bottom of this slope is visible from where we stand. Advocacy of legalized polygamy is growing. A network of grass-roots organizations seeking legal recognition for group marriage already exists. The cause of legalized group marriage is championed by a powerful faction of family law specialists. Influential legal bodies in both the United States and Canada have presented radical programs of marital reform. Some of these quasi-governmental proposals go so far as to suggest the abolition of marriage. The ideas behind this movement have already achieved surprising influence with a prominent American politician..."

What fascinated me was history. This was written in 2003, right after the Supreme Court decision of Lawrence v. Texas. Apparently, saying that what we do in the privacy of our bedrooms is our business set off a firestorm!

Anyway, it struck me how things have changed, and yet they stay the same. Case in point, I heard a few sound bites from Ann Coulter this morning that almost quoted this article. She went into the whole, if gays can marry then we'll have to legalize marriage with children, animals, threesomes, etc. and on and on.

It's interesting that 5 states now have legal marriage between two people of the same sex and not one of them is even considering these other things! How is that possible? You mean gay marriage is legal and it hasn't completely obliterated "traditional" marriage?! Hmmm. Have we heard anything about a state forcing a church or religion to recognize or perform same-sex marriages? Nope. How about the fact that now all of these pedophiles and group sex advocates will not descend in droves onto the state capitals to demand their right to marry? That would be a "no" as well. How is that when the religious right has been telling us for years how these things would absolutely occur if gay marriage was legalized?

Maybe, just maybe, my right to marry my partner isn't something that even affects traditional marriage, much less destroys it! I know it won't stop straight people from wanting to marry each other. It won't stop them from divorcing half the time either.

In 2003, no state had legal gay marriage or civil unions on the books. Jump to 2009...We have 5 states that have decided to recognize gay relationships, legally. I submit there will be many more to come. Why? Because the longer that gay marriage is legal in any state and there is no real impact on traditional marriage, the less the religious rights' arguments will be able to hold any water. Not that they ever did, mind you.

People like my parents will probably always believe that gay marriage is morally wrong and we shouldn't legalize it. However, I am seeing signs everywhere that the majority is starting to see the light. More young people, especially, are seeing gay marriage for what it is...the right of two people who love each other to marry, no matter their gender.

It's only been 6 years since the Lawrence v. Texas and to see the progress we have made does my heart good. Do we have a long way to go? Of course. But it doesn't change the fact that we've come a long way, Baby!

No comments:

Post a Comment