As those who read this blog know all too well, I find it difficult to take seriously many advocates of gay marriage because they make the case for marriage as a right without defending it as a social institution.
No wonder many opponents of gay marriage believe state recognition of gay marriage would put us on a slippery slope to state recognition of polygamous and polyandrous (one woman to multiple men) unions. We might feel we’re on less of a slippery slope if gay marriage advocates both defended marriage as a lifelong sexually exclusive partnership between two individuals and criticized those offering alternate definitions of the institution.
Read his post to see just how he mocks Newsweek. When I read it, I wondered (and not for the first time) how reluctant the leading gay marriage advocates have been to promote the social benefits of marriage and to defend one of the ancient institution’s essential aspects–sexual exclusivity.
Maybe if they did that, gay marriage opponents would find it far more difficult to raise the slippery slope argument.