what slippery slope in gay marriage?
ON SEPTEMBER 23, 2005, the 46-year-old Victor de Bruijn and his 31-year-old wife of eight years, Bianca, presented themselves to a notary public in the small Dutch border town of Roosendaal. And they brought a friend. Dressed in wedding clothes, Victor and Bianca de Bruijn were formally united with a bridally bedecked Mirjam Geven, a recently divorced 35-year-old whom they'd met several years previously through an Internet chatroom. As the notary validated a samenlevingscontract, or "cohabitation contract," the three exchanged rings, held a wedding feast, and departed for their honeymoon.
continue here
5 Comments:
Come on Ab Truth, you are drawing a long bow here... slippery slope??
Slippery slope arguments don't often hold much water. Polygamy is an entirely different issue to gay marriage. If we want to argue about gay civil unions then lets stick to the issues relating to gay marriage.
Besides the Bible is out of step with our modern culture on this one, as the Bible gives loads of support for plural marriage.
Granted Nilmot it is a bit of a long bow... I put it up for discussion but one of my long held contentions is the concept that if people arent Christians why do they bother with any moral position at all... How do they justify without God as lawgiver that anything whether murder or paedophilia is wrong...
I am really surprised we havent gone down this track much earlier and there is a small thought that when the world does it will more clearly delineate the lines between the Christian and non Christian world views
your answer leads to big questions nilmot
is there any good in us at all... some say not and that any good that we do is Gods common Grace.
yes everyone in fact has a moral framework (which is part of my point) but it is totally existential (has its 'feet firmly planted in mid air' as Francis Schaeffer was fond of saying)... so if the final authority for my moral framework is me then it is a license to do whatever i want in reality and is actually no moral framework at all...
yes we have a conscience and this conscience lets us know that we have done wrong, hence guilt, but guilt to whom? this conscience inevitably leads us to the necessity of a moral lawgiver....
People often use a slippery-slope argument when arguing against something, and others often reject these kinds of arguments out of hand. There are two kinds of slippery-slope arguments, and it's important to know the difference when evaluating whether or not an argument is valid. There are causal slippery slopes: because one thing causes a second thing, and we don't want that second thing to happen, we should stop the first thing. These are much more likely to go wrong because it's hard to show many cause-effect relationship between two things.
The other kind is a logical slippery-slope, and this is the one that is much easier to demonstrate. When a principle is used to justify one thing it might also justify another thing that we don't want to happen, and that calls into question whether the principle is a good one.
it is true that we can't really say that is wrong apart from Biblical revelation (if we are interpreting the Bible correctly! lets pretend for a moment that it is as plain as day that homosexuality is condemned)...
most of the defence of homosexuality goes along the lines of monogamous consentual private doesn't affect anyone else etc... but there are plenty of other relationships that cover these areas that are considered wrong as a given (incest for one) and sexual relationships outside of marriage (basically considered wrong as a result of revelation)as well as multiple sexual partners out of marriage... so homosexuality is not a special case issue - it is here that some of the concept of slippery slope arguements could be valid.
why are these relationships wrong? basically because the Bible says that these relationships are corruptions of Gods plan for the way humans should conduct their lives ("perverting" the design of God - see the first para for the basis of this assumption). there is an amount of reasoning against homosexuality besides 'the Bible said so' along the lines of procreation etc etc (lets not go there right now).
So where do we go now?
Does the Bible really condemn homosexual relationships?
Are we interpreting the Bible correctly?
If we are, is the Bible to be seen as truly describing the intention of Gods outline for living? (is it really the word of God?)
If the answers to these questions are 'yes' then how do we respond to this with Christlike love and grace... (the one thing that we Christians have the hardest time with)...
Christians to a certain extent have gotten their response wrong as we have reacted out of our personal distaste for the homosexual act and thus conflict between the groups has taken on a dynamic that is very unChristian...
If the Christian anti-gay believers are right and correct in thier response we should also be having just as much animosity pointed towards us from unmarried couples and those who believe in causal sex, we should be protesting the local bar that is a pick up joint for hetrosexuals just as much as we protest the gay mardi gra???
Post a Comment
<< Home