sigh.

I really, really need to stop debating the legalization of gay marriage, 
or the problems with adoption agencies, with my fellow religious 
conservatives.  Twice, now, in the last few weeks, I've gotten involved in 
debates on people's Facebook walls and found myself pointing to what I 
like to call the "concrete social issues" while the other people have gone 
on and on about what I like to call the "abstract philosophical" aspects 
of the debate; i.e., the other people have been making slippery-slope 
arguments about bestiality and incest and pedophilia and whatnot, and all 
I can say is that I'm not too worried about all that because gay sex has 
been legal for 40 years or so and society's attitude towards all that 
other stuff is, if anything, even stricter than it used to be.  But hey, 
when *I* say that I would like to clarify whether these people believe the 
legalization of gay sex was, on balance, the lesser of two evils (and, if 
so, then why should we pay any attention to the slippery-slope arguments 
that were already proved wrong when they were invoked back *then*), one of 
them replies that I'm dishonestly trying to *trick* them into saying 
something.  Well gosh.  Do slippery slopes only go one way, then?  (And I 
wasn't even *trying* to make a slippery-slope argument.  But still.)

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot