The Slope

Here's an article on gay marriage, arguing against those that argue that opening the door to same-sex matrimony opens the door to all sorts of disordered sexual behavior.

Here's the money quote (third paragraph from the bottom):

While Stanley Kurtz claims he has won the slippery slope debate outright, his analysis, here, is reasonably limited to the dangers of polygamy and polyamory. But beyond just the policy differences between the two, there is also a legal bulwark between Justice Kennedy's reasoning in Lawrence v. Texas (and the Massachusetts decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, which borrowed heavily from the reasoning of Lawrence) and the invasion of the polygamists: The right to sexual privacy Kennedy finds in the line of cases starting with Griswold v. Connecticut, the Connecticut birth-control case from 1965, is an intimate right, between two consenting partners. The court calls these "the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy." The desire of a group of seven people to marry simply does not intuitively fit into that binary sphere of intimacy.

"Intuitively?" The only difference between a binary system of marriage and polygamy is intuitive? Well, I was watching the news with my grandmother the day gay marriage started in Massachusetts. She saw pictures of men in suits kissing on the steps of some capitol building and was horrified. "That's such a disordered perversion," she muttered. "How could anyone think marriage should be between two men or two women?" If you think that the best and most honest argument people have against gay marriage is that it's icky, don't claim that polygamy is icky and not at all related to same-sex matrimony.

Let's be frank: binary relationships are not at all intuitive if you remove family and procreation from the equation. If it's all about love (read: sex) and some vague notion of fulfillment, then anything goes. Don't be surprised when the bigamists and the pedophiles (successfully, because they will win at this rate) use the arguments that gay activists have been using for the past few years.