|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) |
![]() |
NicoleM
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:45 PM Original message |
Refuting the polygamy "slippery slope" argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nicholas D Wolfwood
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:47 PM Response to Original message |
1. Good luck |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NicoleM
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:48 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. By whom? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nicholas D Wolfwood
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:50 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. Just wait. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:49 PM Response to Original message |
3. Even on DU, some defend polygamy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
evil_orange_cat
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:54 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. no marriage in the consitution plz... gay or not... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:56 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. I would object |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
evil_orange_cat
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:00 PM Response to Reply #8 |
14. perhaps... but does gov't have the right to legislate such matters? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:00 PM Response to Reply #14 |
15. Yes it does |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
evil_orange_cat
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:04 PM Response to Reply #15 |
21. depends on how general you want to interpret that... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:05 PM Response to Reply #21 |
23. I am not that socially liberal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
evil_orange_cat
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:34 PM Response to Reply #23 |
37. believe it or not, we somewhat agree... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
htuttle
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:09 PM Response to Reply #6 |
25. A union of 3 or more people is already possible... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:13 PM Response to Reply #25 |
49. Corporations? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
htuttle
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:29 PM Response to Reply #49 |
54. Well... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:45 PM Response to Reply #54 |
60. If You Are Married |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NicoleM
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:55 PM Response to Reply #3 |
7. Why not first cousins? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:57 PM Response to Reply #7 |
10. Unhealthy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NicoleM
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:00 PM Response to Reply #10 |
13. There are a lot of people |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:01 PM Response to Reply #13 |
16. They are wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:02 PM Response to Reply #10 |
17. We applaud the disabled and infertile having children |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:03 PM Response to Reply #17 |
20. We aren't denying the right to have kids |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
evil_orange_cat
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:02 PM Response to Reply #10 |
18. actually, studies have shown the risk of defects to be... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Blue_Chill
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:19 PM Response to Reply #7 |
32. That's just gross...sorry but ewwww. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
trackfan
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:22 PM Response to Reply #7 |
52. Actually, first cousins can marry in 26 states. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
formernaderite
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:43 PM Response to Reply #3 |
59. I would defend polygamy..as long as no children are involved... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blondeatlast
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 06:03 PM Response to Reply #3 |
76. Please, no. Leave the restrictions for laws, not the Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:51 PM Response to Original message |
5. I would treat polygamy like incorporation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnb
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:57 PM Response to Original message |
9. The refutation is easy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 02:58 PM Response to Reply #9 |
11. We are changing the nature of marriage |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:13 PM Response to Reply #11 |
29. the nature of marriage has been changing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:16 PM Response to Reply #29 |
30. No, the nature has remained unchanged for hundreds of years |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:25 PM Response to Reply #30 |
34. sorry, you are quite wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:27 PM Response to Reply #34 |
35. Yes, I do know my history |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:33 PM Response to Reply #35 |
36. well you can did so did not till you are blue in the face |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:37 PM Response to Reply #36 |
39. The nature of MARRIAGE has remained unchanged |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:45 PM Response to Reply #39 |
42. what part of wrong are you not getting? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:58 PM Response to Reply #42 |
43. The history of everything involves change sooner or later |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:13 PM Response to Reply #43 |
50. wrong wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Commie Pinko Dirtbag
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:31 PM Response to Reply #39 |
72. Dissolubility (or lack thereof) IS an attribute. A very important one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:11 PM Response to Reply #30 |
48. How Does Polygamy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:41 PM Response to Reply #48 |
56. not that i am opposed to it being legal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:42 PM Response to Reply #56 |
58. And Why Do Unattached Males |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:50 PM Response to Reply #58 |
61. because it is hard for them to get laid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:04 PM Response to Reply #61 |
65. I Think You Have Just Dissed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 10:09 PM Response to Reply #65 |
77. don't get your shorts in a knot. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mondo joe
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:27 PM Response to Reply #9 |
69. Slippery Slope the Amendment Instead. It works - I tried it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:00 PM Response to Original message |
12. Not A Flame |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:02 PM Response to Reply #12 |
19. Are you arguing for the civil rights of polygamists? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:04 PM Response to Reply #19 |
22. Yep |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:06 PM Response to Reply #22 |
24. A good reason for a Constitutional amendment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:10 PM Response to Reply #24 |
26. No more Confederate style weddings then? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:13 PM Response to Reply #26 |
28. Confederate style weddings? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ihaveaquestion
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:11 PM Response to Reply #22 |
27. OK by me - but Bigamy is already illegal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hamlette
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:38 PM Response to Reply #22 |
40. are you willing to pick up the costs of polygamy? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:44 PM Response to Reply #40 |
41. You could check the Defense budget |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hamlette
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:55 PM Response to Reply #41 |
63. yes, plenty of money could be saved by cutting defense |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:06 PM Response to Reply #40 |
47. Do They Lie in Order To Receive The Benefits? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hamlette
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:05 PM Response to Reply #47 |
66. I'm talking about the ones they get legitimately |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:11 PM Response to Reply #66 |
68. Excuse Me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mick Knox
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:16 PM Response to Original message |
31. How does raising questions for the court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NicoleM
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:21 PM Response to Reply #31 |
33. You're right. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DemBones DemBones
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:30 PM Response to Reply #31 |
71. I agree that the original poster's arguments are not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Astarho
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 10:46 PM Response to Reply #71 |
78. Small correction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NewJeffCT
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:34 PM Response to Original message |
38. How about this for refuting? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Brotherjohn
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:59 PM Response to Reply #38 |
44. Exactly. The issue is equal protection. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:18 PM Response to Reply #38 |
51. Easy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MAlibdem
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 03:59 PM Response to Original message |
45. Slippery slope arguments in general are crap |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:02 PM Response to Reply #45 |
46. Funny they always seem to work for OUR issues, just not THEIR issues |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yellowcanine
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:27 PM Response to Reply #46 |
53. People on all sides resort to the slippery slope argument but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Brotherjohn
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:33 PM Response to Reply #46 |
55. You have to at least be on the same slope, though. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:02 PM Response to Reply #55 |
64. Clearly some do indeed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Brotherjohn
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:28 PM Response to Reply #64 |
70. Well, others (incl. the sponsor of the amendment in Congress now)... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muddleoftheroad
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:35 PM Response to Reply #70 |
73. Both are unions of consenting adults |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Brotherjohn
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:55 PM Response to Reply #73 |
74. No, but merely because they are linked does not mean that they... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DemBones DemBones
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 06:01 PM Response to Reply #70 |
75. Regarding slippery slopes, polygamy, and bestiality, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
uhhuh
![]() |
Sat Feb-28-04 12:05 AM Response to Reply #75 |
80. And? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:42 PM Response to Reply #46 |
57. our ? do you have a mouse in your pocket? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hammie
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 04:53 PM Response to Original message |
62. Ask a gun owner. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
outinforce
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 05:05 PM Response to Reply #62 |
67. Or Someone Who Supports |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nikia
![]() |
Fri Feb-27-04 11:29 PM Response to Original message |
79. I agree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 08:26 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC