The Federal Prop. 8 Trial / Gay Marriage Catch-All

The question of polygamy as part of the slippery slope is amusing to me, as marriage, not gay marriage, opens that question. The legality of gay marriage is no more legally or socially complex than heterosexual marriage. In fact, there are notable societal benefits to permitting it. It doesn't change the arguments against polygamy. Gay marriage is not somewhere further down a slope, it's a correction.

Malor wrote:

I've really wondered, though, if the slippery slope argument might not apply. I mean, people arguing for the right to arrange their social lives how they see fit is the ultimate endgame here, I would think.

I don't really see it that way at all. To me, the question of gay marriage in the legal sense has always been pretty cut and dry. We cannot discriminate, as a nation, on the basis of gender. It's specifically disallowed on so many levels. The fact is that states and other organizations are having to go out of their way to actually forbid gay marriage, because it was not expressly forbidden beforehand. So what is the slippery slope? Tightening the definition of marriage up more and more, or correcting our concept of marriage to fit how we see adults and individuals legally in 99% of how this nation functions?

Polygamy at least has biblical precedent so I'm not sure why the Vatican's bringing that argument out.

Besides which, why not have the debate on polygamy? You have the debate on everything, opinions are reinforced or changed as the broader discussion continues, people vote when things reach a point where it's time to make a decision and sometimes things change. That's democracy in action.

Polygamy is the traditional form of marriage.

Maq wrote:

Polygamy at least has biblical precedent so I'm not sure why the Vatican's bringing that argument out.

Besides which, why not have the debate on polygamy? You have the debate on everything, opinions are reinforced or changed as the broader discussion continues, people vote when things reach a point where it's time to make a decision and sometimes things change. That's democracy in action.

I think the problem is not "we can't talk about polygamy". The problem is that people keep trying to draw an association between gay marriage and polygamy.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Polygamy is the traditional form of marriage.

If I may, polygamy is a traditional form of marriage. Polygamy, like being single, or having one spouse, was one of several traditional forms of marriage.

(Also in the mix, concubinage was also a traditional aspect of live in many ancient lands.)

That is why the "slippery slope" argument is rather hollow. You can't have the slippery slope when we have already gone down it, up the other side, and moved on.

Phoenix Rev wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Polygamy is the traditional form of marriage.

If I may, polygamy is a traditional form of marriage. Polygamy, like being single, or having one spouse, was one of several traditional forms of marriage.

(Also in the mix, concubinage was also a traditional aspect of live in many ancient lands.)

That is why the "slippery slope" argument is rather hollow. You can't have the slippery slope when we have already gone down it, up the other side, and moved on.

It's an awfully slippery slope when someone spills Santorum all over it.

NSMike wrote:

The question of polygamy as part of the slippery slope is amusing to me, as marriage, not gay marriage, opens that question. The legality of gay marriage is no more legally or socially complex than heterosexual marriage. In fact, there are notable societal benefits to permitting it. It doesn't change the arguments against polygamy. Gay marriage is not somewhere further down a slope, it's a correction.

I hadn't actually considered that perspective. Thanks, Mike.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
NSMike wrote:

The question of polygamy as part of the slippery slope is amusing to me, as marriage, not gay marriage, opens that question. The legality of gay marriage is no more legally or socially complex than heterosexual marriage. In fact, there are notable societal benefits to permitting it. It doesn't change the arguments against polygamy. Gay marriage is not somewhere further down a slope, it's a correction.

I hadn't actually considered that perspective. Thanks, Mike.

Yeah I thought this was a new and interesting angle as well. I will be incorporating it into my arsenal of marriage equality points.

I'm assuming there were also slippery slope arguments made against giving anyone but land-owning white males the vote, integrating schools, recognizing mixed race marriages and labeling pizza a vegetable but so far society appears to be trucking along like always and I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

Yes, but the jackboots will be FABULOUS!!!

Tanglebones wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

Yes, but the jackboots will be FABULOUS!!!

Of course! Even in fascism, there is no excuse for non-fabulousness.

Well, as long as the llama will play MMOs with me then I guess it'll be okay. I can't even get my current wife to do that.

/gamer agenda

Kehama wrote:

Well, as long as the llama will play MMOs with me then I guess it'll be okay. I can't even get my current wife to do that.

/gamer agenda

We will do our best.

We may be jackbooted thugs, but we still have a heart... somewhere.

Lest we get carried away with good news:
http://www.examiner.com/article/ugan...

Ugandan leader: Passing ‘Kill the Gays bill’ will be ‘Christmas gift’
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

Yes, but the jackboots will be FABULOUS!!!

Of course! Even in fascism, there is no excuse for non-fabulousness.

Fabuliscim would be a great little commie boutique.

Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

I assume one of the gay bullet points on your gay agenda is "gay time machine" then too, 'cos Kehama ain't getting any younger...

IMAGE(http://toata.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/doctorwhopic.jpg)

Bloo Driver wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

Yes, but the jackboots will be FABULOUS!!!

Of course! Even in fascism, there is no excuse for non-fabulousness.

Fabuliscim would be a great little commie boutique.

I love GWJ so freaking much.

Jonman wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

I assume one of the gay bullet points on your gay agenda is "gay time machine" then too, 'cos Kehama ain't getting any younger...

IMAGE(http://toata.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/doctorwhopic.jpg)

Ugh. No. Nonononono. TARDIS blue, thank you very much.

/geek agenda

Rubb Ed wrote:
Jonman wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
Kehama wrote:

I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

Rubb Ed and I are working on making that happen.

/gay agenda

I assume one of the gay bullet points on your gay agenda is "gay time machine" then too, 'cos Kehama ain't getting any younger...

IMAGE(http://toata.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/doctorwhopic.jpg)

Ugh. No. Nonononono. TARDIS blue, thank you very much.

/geek agenda

That's not pink anyway. That is clearly fuchsia.

/really gay

I don't know... *tilts head* is it more fuchsia or more raspberry?

Phoenix Rev wrote:

That's not pink anyway. That is clearly fuchsia.

/really gay

I'd like to add an action item to the gay agenda. Can you guys just up and publish a list of all the colors, ranked by relative gayness? Just to clear up these kinds of confusion in the future, for those of us who don't have an instinctive gaydar for Pantone colors. :p

Jonman wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

That's not pink anyway. That is clearly fuchsia.

/really gay

I'd like to add an action item to the gay agenda. Can you guys just up and publish a list of all the colors, ranked by relative gayness? Just to clear up these kinds of confusion in the future, for those of us who don't have an instinctive gaydar for Pantone colors. :p

Just avoid everything outside a 16 count Crayola box.

It's what I do. Works great.

Bloo Driver wrote:
Jonman wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

That's not pink anyway. That is clearly fuchsia.

/really gay

I'd like to add an action item to the gay agenda. Can you guys just up and publish a list of all the colors, ranked by relative gayness? Just to clear up these kinds of confusion in the future, for those of us who don't have an instinctive gaydar for Pantone colors. :p

Just avoid everything outside a 16 count Crayola box.

It's what I do. Works great.

16? Well Ooh La La there Mary. You get 4 colors at the IHOP, like the good lord intended!

KingGorilla wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:
Jonman wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:

That's not pink anyway. That is clearly fuchsia.

/really gay

I'd like to add an action item to the gay agenda. Can you guys just up and publish a list of all the colors, ranked by relative gayness? Just to clear up these kinds of confusion in the future, for those of us who don't have an instinctive gaydar for Pantone colors. :p

Just avoid everything outside a 16 count Crayola box.

It's what I do. Works great.

16? Well Ooh La La there Mary. You get 4 colors at the IHOP, like the good lord intended!

Ugh, those crayons are crap. So glad my parents let me bring my own.

Raspberry has more red undertones. It could very well be raspberry in the paintcan, but with the outdoor lighting in that particular photo, it has the distinctly blue undertones of fuchsia.

Yeah, I have to agree, that's not pink, it's fuschia. And it's still wrong for the TARDIS.

Kehama wrote:

I'm assuming there were also slippery slope arguments made against giving anyone but land-owning white males the vote, integrating schools, recognizing mixed race marriages and labeling pizza a vegetable but so far society appears to be trucking along like always and I wasn't forced to marry an interracial llama by jackbooted government thugs upon my 18th birthday.

So you're saying you're under 18? I'd like to introduce you to my friend *Legion*.

Bonus_Eruptus wrote:

So you're saying you're under 18? I'd like to introduce you to my friend *Legion*.

I was 18 17 years ago. If *Legion* has a Tardis I may have been in trouble. Wait... could be have been in trouble... ow.. brain... hurting from... temporal tense conflict!

FYI...

The SCOTUS has moved the conference to discuss granting cert to the Prop. 8 case to Nov. 30.

My guess is they are doing a lot of soul searching after the election results.

Do they punt and left California return to providing gay marriage and leave the issue open for further litigation in the future? Do they grant cert and then rule it is constitutional and tell the voters of California to fix the problem themselves? Or do they rule it unconstitutional with the effect of any stating having gay marriage never being allowed to rescind that right?

My guess is that Scalia, Thomas and Alito will go with the second option, while the rest except Roberts and perhaps Kennedy going for the third option.

Realistically, I think they will choose the first option, but that is a gut feeling.