Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 21:18:31 +0300 (EEST) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: Pete Ehlke <pde@rfc822.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Senator Santorum Message-ID: <20030507211528.M40030-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <20030506175400.GA28671@rfc822.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 6 May 2003, Pete Ehlke wrote: > On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 10:23:42AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > > > > "And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex > > within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to > > polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. > > You have the right to anything." > > > > You can find more context here: > > http://www.ncsfreedom.org/news/bigotedsen.htm > > > > The annoying thing about what he said from the standpoint of the gay > > rights folks is that he's right. It really is a slippery legal slope. > > I know I'm going to regret this, but... > > Please explain the slippery slope that lies between consensual sex among > adults who are not married to one another and bigamy and polygamy, > which are marriage to multiple partners. I really, really don't follow > that one at all. > This would mean you first have to explain why bi- or polygamy are or should be illegal. Its even trickier in the US, where 'unmarried cohabitation' is still a crime in many states...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030507211528.M40030-100000>