Choice, Sexuality, and Where We Draw the Line
One of the most eagerly dismissed arguments against the legalization of same-sex marriage is the “slippery slope” one. Liberals have taken a lot of pleasure in mocking this argument. No, silly Christians, we aren’t going to legalize polygamy next. No, people aren’t going to marry their pets. How stupid are you? This is just about homosexuals. Go back to your guns and your Bibles.
But, as reliably as clockwork, we are already starting to see the next phase in the liberal movement. With nationwide same-sex marriage nearly in the bag, these groups are turning their attention to other forms of sexual deviancy to see what they can do.
On the public support generated by shows like Sister Wives and Big Love, liberals like Jillian Keenan of Slate have argued that it’s time to make it legal for people to marry as many partners as they wish. “Legalized polygamy in the United States is the constitutional, feminist, and sex-positive choice.”
More disturbingly, however, there is a growing movement against the stigma of pedophilia. Anyone who wants a front row seat to this movement need only turn their browsers to Reddit, where the left-leaning libertarians miss no chance to defend child pornography. According to the deep thinkers on that site, pedophilia is as inborn as homosexuality. Therefore, it is hardly fair to cast pedophiles as society’s villains.
This type of thought isn’t limited to basement-dwelling internet nerds. Last year, the L.A. Times released a story that argued that experts now viewed pedophilia as they do homosexuality. “It is a deep-rooted predisposition,” said the paper, “limited almost entirely to men, that becomes clear during puberty and does not change.”
Of course, the truth or fiction of that argument is entirely irrelevant. Psychology has shown us that any number of deviant behaviors are inborn. Those that aren’t are often developed by one’s upbringing, over which a person has as little control as their genetics. In fact, when you get right down to it, you can make the argument that a person has no control whatsoever over what kinds of urges they may deal with in life.
This is where we’re headed, and the implications are scary. With these kinds of arguments, you can remove personal responsibility from the equation altogether. Humans are just breathing automatons, guided by forces over which they cannot control. If you’re angry enough, go ahead and kill somebody. It’s not your fault. You couldn’t have made any other choice. We should understand that.
This is the way a society collapses. When we throw our hands in the air and say, “okay, fine…anything goes,” we might as well suspend the laws and see what happens. I don’t think the outcome will be pretty.
Comments are closed.