Slippery Slope Marriage

[Shendude]

Opponents of Gay marriage will sometimes will appeal to the slippery slope fallacy, caliming that if gay marriage becomes legal, it's only a matter of time before other "perversions" such as polygamy and incest are also legalized.

Obviously, this is nonsense, but methinks one could write a fun story about what would result if this did in fact occur.

Any takers?

 

[silverwhisper]

why, even in jest, legitimize a bullshit argument?

ed

 

[Shendude]

why, even in jest, legitimize a bullshit argument?

ed

Hey, a good idea is a good idea, regardless of the source.

 

[mia_erotica]

You just can't put nuts in your mouth anymore (Craig Ferguson)

 

[emap]

It may be a bullpucky argument but governments used it, vietnam and korea come to mind quickly.

trouthead has a certain point though. Not that what we do on here gives any credibility to anything, the people against gay marriage wouldn't admit to reading anything here anyway.

Though I can see a sort of goading story working best, like gay marriage is allowed then comes polygamy and swinging becomes an everyday fact of life. two hundred years after gay marriage is legalized, the world is very different, children are born, at which point they are shuttled away to live in a school, think catholic dorm school type thingy. They are released at the age of 18, virgins and horny as possible to be and stay alive. they are assigned complex rooms, these rooms are nothing more than a bed large enough for small orgies or gangbangs, people have sex everywhere with everyone. Machines make food clean up after people and do everything menial. People are free to do whatever they want, which is almost always sex, though some draw sex, and some write sex, which is distributed freely by machines.

There's no more religion, everyone just thanks whoever just gave them sex before rolling over to sleep or have sex again. OK dang I wanna live in this place.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

why, even in jest, legitimize a bullshit argument?

The 'slippery slope' argument isn't bullshit per se though where the slope leads may be misinterpreted. I don't believe that incest will be legalised because homosexual "marriage" has been legalised, but I do think polygamy may be. After all, it is in the same position that homosexual relationships were twenty years ago - that is illegal but practised in some places without any action being taken to prevent it.

... Not that what we do on here gives any credibility to anything, ...

Thank goodness. I would hate some of our stories to be true!

... the people against gay marriage wouldn't admit to reading anything here anyway. ...

Why not? I read, and occasionally write, on Lit, but I do not believe that homosexual relationships can be called "marriages".

I can understand the proposition that there needs to be a legal framework for two people living semi-permanently as a partnership, but I think that legal framework should apply also to two siblings sharing a house, or a son/daughter caring for an elderly parent.

The difference is that marriage implies (at least) the possibility of children, whereas no matter how much desire there may be, a homosexual couple cannot produce a child of both of them.

In the UK homosexual pairings are considered Civil Partnerships and are quite distinct legally from Civil (ie non-religious) Marriages.

As to homosexuality itself, I really don't mind who does what to whom and with which, as long as they don't frighten the horses, or expect me to join in.

 

[mia_erotica]

It doesn't have to be a world w/o religion, we just adjust religion to suit our new views; ixnay the guilt.

 

[mike_writes]

You actually make some very good points. Like you, I'm pretty certain that incest won't be legalized anytime soon, but polygamy isn't quite so impossible. It has been legal in ancient history and is currently legal in some parts of the world.

As to whether gay marriage is a good thing, I also have an unusual take on it. I would be happy to legalize it through the legislative process, but I think it is a bad idea to legalize it through the judicial process - we will have a long divisive battle unless the country goes through the hard work of creating legislative majorities in favor of it. - least that's the view of this straight male who enjoys the occasional gay fantasy.

But steering away from politics and back to the original thread, there are definitely some erotic possibilities in incest or polygamous marriages. Perhaps every young woman's 'first' husband is their father. Or going further down the sci-fi path, perhaps we could legalize marriage to artificially intelligent robots. Or after first contact with aliens, we could have a story that traced the battle to legalize marriage between humans and the alien species.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

You actually make some very good points. ...

That's got to be a first for this forum ...

Joking aside:

... I'm pretty certain that incest won't be legalized anytime soon, but polygamy isn't quite so impossible. It has been legal in ancient history and is currently legal in some parts of the world. ...

Actually polygamy is legal for a majority of the population of the planet.

... Or after first contact with aliens, we could have a story that traced the battle to legalize marriage between humans and the alien species.

First contact with aliens is going to cause absolute mayhem in the religious communities of the world, who are really the ones who provide the impetus for the formalisation of partnerships. I suspect that finding out that humanity is not some special creation of a deity will be so faith-shattering that minor matters, such as marriage to aliens, will just be lost in the noise.

 

[mike_writes]

First contact with aliens is going to cause absolute mayhem in the religious communities of the world, who are really the ones who provide the impetus for the formalisation of partnerships. I suspect that finding out that humanity is not some special creation of a deity will be so faith-shattering that minor matters, such as marriage to aliens, will just be lost in the noise.

If we were to make contact with an intelligent alien species that had no notions of religion or spirituality at all, I could see such contact producing a crisis of faith. However, if the new species has independently developed ideas about religion that are similar or even uncannily similar to our own, it might have the effect of reinforcing faith. I think I remember at least one original Star Trek episode that revolved around this theme.

I'm not sure that the worlds greatest spiritual paths depend on humankind being alone at the pinnacle of creation, anymore than they depended on the earth lying at the physical center of the universe. Hinduism and Buddhism in particular regard all forms of life as different levels of spiritual progression. Christian teaching hints that their are many parts of creation that are as yet undiscovered: ''Other flocks I have that you know not of'' and ''In my Father's house there are many mansions''.

So I'm not altogoether certain that first contact would end religion, although it might significantly tranform religious beliefs. I do see your point that marriage laws might be lost in the noise though.

 

[snoopercharmbrights]

... If we were to make contact with an intelligent alien species that had no notions of religion or spirituality at all, I could see such contact producing a crisis of faith. However, if the new species has independently developed ideas about religion that are similar or even uncannily similar to our own, it might have the effect of reinforcing faith. ...

Oddly, I think the precise opposite. If the aliens have no concept of religion, then humans remain the deity's special creation, the top of the pecking order, with dominion over all other creatures in the universe. Hence the religions are not too upset to discover that other creatures exist, but can assume that, like the animals, they have no souls.

If there is a religion among the aliens similar to our religions then the problem arises of which species is actually the deity's special creation. If the aliens were shaped differently from us (ie they look non-humanoid) then their lack of souls would be"indisputable"!

I wonder what the theologians make of the recent observations of the chimpanzee which plans ahead to the extent of gathering stones together in a pile while the zoo is closed, so that it has ammunition to throw at the spectators when the zoo re-opens? Can they still find characteristics which are distinctly and exclusively human?

... I'm not sure that the worlds greatest spiritual paths depend on humankind being alone at the pinnacle of creation, ... Hinduism and Buddhism in particular regard all forms of life as different levels of spiritual progression. ...

In both the Hindu and Buddhist religions humanity is the highest form of corporeal life in the universe. Any higher forms are pure spirit with no physical bodies.

To take the explanation of Hindu belief in Kim by Rudyard Kipling as an example, the cobra causes the holy man to say to Kim that the soul must have performed some terrible acts in its previous life as a human to be reincarnated as a cobra. There is no trace of a hint that nirvana can be reached direct from the cobra form; first the soul must again be reincarnated as a human.

... anymore than they depended on the earth lying at the physical center of the universe ...

The concept of the "centre of the universe" is merely a mathematical construct and it is wholly possible to define the position in which I sit at this moment as the centre of the universe. There is nothing inherently inconsistent in such an assumption; it just makes the formulae for the movement of celestial bodies more complicated than some other assumptions. If we are solely concerned with the solar system then it simplifies the mathematics to assume the sun is at the "centre" (ignoring the eccentricity of the planets' orbits). If we consider the Milky Way galaxy that makes no sense at all.