YES, WE'VE OPENED THE DOOR TO POLYGAMY AND INCEST

*

http://godfatherpolitics.com/11757/yes-weve-opened-the-door-to-polygamy-and-incest-we-just-didnt-want-to-admit-it-before/

Yes, We’ve Opened The Door To Polygamy And Incest: We Just Didn’t Want To Admit It Before

TG: No kidding? WMD has been saying that for some ten years. Believe us now? Add pedophilia and bestiality to their list.

{{So how would this “slippery slope” danger play out? Is the worry that recognizing marriage equality for gays and lesbians will drive straight men into the arms of their sisters? Well, now you’ve lost me.” }}

That was written before the Supreme Court’s decision. Now that the decision has been made, Greenfield is suddenly changing message:

“It’s  been a few weeks since the victories in the marriage cases at the Supreme Court, and maybe it’s time for the political left to own up to something. You know those opponents of marriage equality who said government approval of same-sex marriage might erode bans on polygamous and incestuous marriages? They’re right. As a matter of constitutional rationale, there is indeed a slippery slope between recognizing same-sex marriages and allowing marriages among more than two people and between consenting adults who are related"

http://prospect.org/article/slippery-slope-polygamy-and-incest#.UeP6aKSuqBs.twitter

The Slippery Slope to Polygamy and Incest

Opponents of same-sex marriage have long argued that allowing such unions will lead to marriages among more than two people and between adults who are related. They're right.

If anything, the argument from political disenfranchisement cuts the other way—that polygamous and incestuous couples deserve more constitutional protection than same-sex couples.

... we can fess up. We can admit our arguments in favor of marriage equality inexorably lead us to a broader battle in favor of allowing people to define their marriages, and their families, by their own lights.