The Ashford Zone Blog

In New Hampshire: governor still mulling over signing the bill [UPDATE: Nope.  It still requires some signatures from Senate and House leaders — bureaucracy, on other words.  It hasn't even reached the gov's desk.]

In New York: NY state assembly passed marriage equality bill yesterday.

Media Matters has a nice compilation of the right-wing pushback, complete with their "slippery slope" argument:

Let me address the slippery slope argument (again), because it just doesn't seem to die.

First of all, as with all slippery slope arguments, there's no guarantee that just because X happens, Y is inevitable. 

That's because society is not comprised of idiots. The slippery slope argument assumes that society and the law can't make distinctions between situations that are different from one another.

The truth is, we can tell apples from oranges. For example, women got the right to vote, but that did not automatically mean that infants were next to get that right.  Where was the slippery slope there?  It simply didn't exist.

Sure, in the wake of universal acceptance of gay marriage, others (VERY VERY few, I might add) could argue that they want to marry their relatives or have multiple legal spouses.  But those arguments would have to be separately evaluated.

The slippery slope starts to get UNslippery when you address these other marriage arrangements head-on.  There are compelling reasons to ban incestuous and polygamous marriages, including genetic concerns about the children of incestuous marriages, the importance of preventing coercion and abuse within families, the increased likelihood of fraudulent (i.e., unloving) unions merely intending to take advantage of laws favoring married people (tax breaks, etc.), and concerns about how young girls and women have fared historically under polygamy.

Also, with polygamy, there is a clear community harm.  Historically, polygamy tends to be one man with many wives; it therefore takes many more women than men out of the marriage pool. This leaves heterosexual men with fewer marriage opportunities. Unattached men with poor marital prospects destabilize societies, and large numbers of such men in a society require strong mechanisms of state control to rein them in.  (Polygamy would also be a bitch to administrate from a government standpoint.)

By contrast, where is the compelling reason to bar same-sex couples from marriage?  It doesn't exist.  Permitting marriages of same-sex couples strengthens families and harms no individual.  Nor does it create a communal harm; in fact, just the opposite — gay marriage helps ensure marriageable partners for everyone; polygamy does the opposite.

This is why you can't equate gay marriage with polygamy or other forms of marriage.  Gay marriage harms no individual, takes advantage of no sub-class, is not prone to "sham" marriages, and creates no societal harm.  Can any of that be said for polygamous and incestuous marriages?  Absolutely not, and historical evidence bears this out.  It is those factors which prevent the slope from being slippery.

So, bringing up polygamy, incest and turtle-marriage is simply a dodge — an attempt to distract people from the injustice of denying same-sex couples the same opportunity to marry that different-sex couples want to preserve for themselves. 

What is this?  Footloose?

17 year old Tyler Frost wanted to go to the prom with his girlfriend.  The problem? She attends a public school; he attends a Christian school.  Specifically, he attends a fundamentalist Baptist school in Ohio which forbids dancing, rock music and hand-holding.

He went anyway, and the heavens did not open up with God's wrath, and the sky did not fall.

But that didn't stop his school from going after him anyway — he was suspended.

On its website, the school responds to the controversy:

As you probably already know, Heritage has received a lot of local and regional attention today. If you don’t know what I am talking about, you can read the article in today’s courier (www.thecourier.com Read “Don’t go to the prom…”). My guess is that many of you were bombarded at work with questions and statements. In fact, I have had e-mails this morning telling me that great opportunities to give the gospel have taken place. I believe I ought to address the situation. 

First, the article in the Courier is fairly accurate. What the article leaves out are the principles behind the rules. In the Old Testament, Joseph was in a place of temptation and he fled. Unlike this situation, he didn’t put himself in that place. 

A slave being seduced by his master's wife vs. prom date.  Same difference (roflmao)

Proverbs 4:23 says, “Keep your heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues of life.” II Timothy 2:22 says, “Flee also youthful lusts but follow after righteousness faith charity and peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.” 

Isn't there something in II Timothy 2 about instructing gently rather than punishing?

When the school committee, many years before I became the principal, set up the policy regarding dancing, I am confident that they had the principle of fleeing lustful situations in mind. The question as I see it is, should a Christian place themselves at an event where young ladies will have low cut dresses and be dancing in them? Isn’t it contrary to the example of Joseph and the verses that I stated?

Why, yes.  Yes it is.  It's a prom, as opposed to bedroom seduction scene.  By the way, Jesus hung out with whores, so….

Second, at the beginning of the school year, every family must sign a statement of cooperation. Students in 7^th through 12^th grades must also sign it. It doesn’t say that you have to agree with them, but that we will all abide by them. 

Fair enough, although those things aren't legally binding.

What kind of a school would we be if we suspended a policy because it was convenient to do so? That would not be a Christ-like response. Jesus did not avoid trouble. 

So this 17 year old student, who got into trouble by attending a prom in a public school, is Christ-like.  QED.

He made statements such as, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but by me” (John 14:6). His statements didn’t make Him popular with the world. Can we expect anything else? The verses that I have thought of throughout this day are Matthew 5:11-12, “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” Wow! I can build up a whole lot of rewards in heaven today, and so can you. 

Can those be exchanged for frequent flyer miles?

Third, when discussing this particular issue with folks in the community please remember that the servant of the Lord "must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness" (2 Tim 2:24, 25).

Yup.  That's the part of Timothy I was thinking of.

Esther received great counsel from her uncle Mordecai when he said, “And who knoweth whether thou art come into the kingdom for such a time as this.” (Esther 4:14). This is a time for Heritage to shine as a light in this world. It isn’t easy, but it is right.

Just like Adam and Eve riding the dinosaurs to church.