I am strongly opposed to gay marriage. I think it greatly damages the institution of marriage. I consider marriage to be one of the foundations of civilization. I think the rapid rise in the number of divorces (at about 50% presently) is one of the symptoms of the decline of our civilization. I have always argued that one of the reasons to oppose gay marriage is the precedent it will set for other prohibited marriages. ( I should note that I do support a system of civil union for both heterosexual and homosexual committed relationships) The supporters of gay marriage have always denied that it would set a precedent. Well, I am sad to say I have been proven right. As this article shows, there is already a case, Muth v. Frank, that is attempting to argue that incestuous marriages between consenting adults should be legal. They are using the exact same language that the arguments in the gay marriage cases use. How long do you think it's going to be before a polygamist uses the language to argue that polygamy should be legal and protected? I predict the very next time a polygamist is arrested.
We started down this slippery slope forty years ago with the two Connecticut
birth control cases that first created a "right" to privacy. Along the way we have coarsened society, killed millions of babies and begun the destruction of the institution of marriage. It's not too late to go back. I hope.