maycocksean
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I'll ask again, what if the incest is homosexual in nature? No fear of inbreeding and their orientation can't be denied anymore than other homosexuals can it?
I believe I answered. I'll try again:
To me there are couple of keys to differentiating other types of sexual relationships fro homosexuality.
The first is Consent. This should be the first rule of all sexual relationships--mutual consent between adults period. Anything that doesn't fall under that is out of bounds. Anything that does fall under that is all the government should really be concerned about when recognizing the legitimacy of relationships. Homosexual relationships involve consenting adults--incest and polygamous relationships, which are the favorite bugaboos of the slippery slope folk often do not.
Secondly is the issue of Orientation. Relationships between relatives and between more than one person are not issues of a person's identity, or their sexual orientation. The idea that one need not--and should not--act on every attraction they feel towards another person is something that both homosexuals and heterosexuals can understand. For example when a person is in a committed relationship whether gay or straight, and he or she feels an intense attraction to another person he or she can--and should--choose to remain faithful to their partner. This choice does not compromise that person's identity in any way, nor does it shut them off from the possibility of a meaningful relationship--after all they are IN one.
But sexual orientation is not a choice, and many opponents of SSM even concede this point. Of course, as soon as they concede the point, the fight is already over. There is no legitimate argument against SSM once you concede that homosexuality is an orientation and not a lifestyle choice. Indeed, all the comparisons to incest, polygamy etc inherently assume that homosexuality is a choice one can take or leave in much the way that one can take or leave a second or third wife, a sexual relationship with a sibling or whatever else.
In regards to incest and polygamy, Christians in particular don't have much of a leg to stand on in using those as proof of the slippery slope, as both practices were part of the lives of several key Biblical "role models" if you will including Abraham and Jacob (polygamy and incest) and Solomon and David (polygamy) and Ruth and Boaz (incest). I realize these practices are frowned upon in our culture today and with good reason, but this is not the strongest foundation for attacking homosexuality. Marrying close relatives or having more than one wife were cultural practices that were once acceptable and no longer are, that's all.
I think very strong arguments can be made about the damage that can be done as incestuous relationships get closer in relation. Cousins, maybe not so much a big deal--just culturally frowned upon, brother and sisters increasingly problematic, and parent and child downright dangerous. But as has been pointed out, that's probably for another thread.