It’s a slippery slope?

for Bobo >

“Well, it is a slippery slope, you know…”.

Anytime you hear this in an argument, that person has lost.  That person is also, I promise, an asshole.  Everything that follows that phrase is guaranteed to be dumb.  I know because it is an admission that your argument is weak.  These are the assholes who argue that if you legalize gay marriage… all manner of sickness will descend on society.  I actually heard a guy call in to the talk radio and say “well, if you let guys marries guys, it’s a slippery slope.  What’s next, people marrying dogs or monkeys?”  Here is why this is a poor argument:  A bill would be written to specify a ‘man and a woman or a man and a man or a woman and a woman:  no other permutations’.

Also, by taking this ‘slippery slope’ position, you severely weaken your initial point. Basically, you are saying “I am fine with gays being married, but I draw the line at pets.”  If it was a solid argument, it would stop with ‘gays should not marry’.  Your syllogism should end there.  Instead… when you reveal that all manner of other things will fall as a result… you have negated your initial argument.  Once you compare it to something completely different, you have negated your original point. This isn’t a piece about gay marriage at all.  It’s about use of logic and language.  I will fight for the right for gays to marry.  I am a reverend, and I will actually marry them (editors note, since I wrote this a few years ago, I have done a gay wedding.  It was the best wedding I have ever facilitated.  More importantly, I will fight for the English language and I will fight your shitty syllogisms and lazy execution of logic.

I don’t like chili beers.  I think that idea is disgusting.  I am not going to compare that to shit, though.  I don’t need to.  I don’t care what you put in beer, or all the different ideas.  I just know that chili in beer sucks balls.  Have it all you want.

That is fine, I think we can all agree on that.  Well, maybe not this guy.

If you feel that gays should be not allowed to marry, your point has to be stronger than monkey fucking as the inevitable outcome.

Oh, and don’t say the bible says so, either… you assholes.  Yes, the bible says man should not lie with man.  However, it also says slaves are fine, cast your women out of the village if they are menstruating, or kill them if they are wearing cloths of a different kind.  So, let’s stop sourcing the bible for morality.  The first testament has father/daughter sex in it.  Yeah… like MacKenzie & John Phillips type stuff.

In conclusion, gays should be allowed to marry.  If you are against that, fine, but you need a way better argument.

The second group of people who use that term is gun nuts.  I don’t even want to bother with this group.  These guys are zealots, and logic will not work on them.  Plus, they are all self righteous and feel they are actually better citizens than those of us who are not armed.  “you can’t ban high capacity magazines.  I need 64 bullets to protect my property.  Plus, if you ban high capacity magazines next it will be my grenades or shoulder fired missile or my .22 hunting rifle.  It’s a slippery slope!”  Go ahead, try and talk about guns with a gun nut.  I dare you.  Just try and say “I don’t think babies should have machine guns.”

Here is the third group of meatheads who say ‘It’s a slippery slope’:  anti drug people.  These folks believe if you legalize marijuana, within days the streets will be filled with dead whores and junkies.  These are the ‘gateway drug’ folks.  Know what is a gateway drug?  Water.  Yup.  I studied drug addict in history, and they all started on water.  So, Denver recently legalized marijuana.  We actually have more weed dispensaries in Denver than Starbucks. Go ahead and read that sentence again.

So, what happened to Denver?  Did we all end up as junkies?  Nope, because they only legalized weed.  The law is extremely specific, as laws tend to be.  Yup, no slope.  Instead, we are saving millions on not arresting and incarcerating smokers, and making even more by selling it and taxing it.  You know your annoying friend who is obsessed with legalization?  the one who is always spouting facts, and reminding you that he first American Flag was made of hemp.  Well, that guy was right.  No crime problem, no uptick in drug abuse, and we are making shitloads of money by taxing stoners.  It’s win win!

If your point and opinion is valid, it need not a qualifier of any kind.  You would not say “don’t run a stoplight, because if you do.. it’s a slippery slope.  It could lead to accidents, tickets, and copycat behavior.  If you are all driving through stop signs with your kid in the car, he will be learning to also run stop signs.  Then, his buddies will start doing the same.  It’s a slippery slope from one rolling ‘California; stop to all laws of traffic coming apart.

If people take advantage of gay marriage laws, and then marry their donkey, THEN you get to say ‘told you it was a bad idea’.  Here is what you should do.  Just say this “I don’t like gay marriage.  I don’t think it is right on many levels.”  You are now done.  You don’t have to say why, or to rationalize it to anymore.

I am not sure if my beef is with that stupid phrase… or the people who employ it.  Frankly, both must be stopped.  A bigger concern for society should probably be why this piece dipped into several monkey ejaculation references.  How does that serve the conversation?  Frankly, someone should edit this garbage a little better.  But, if you limit the language, you start down a road of censorship.  First, you tell him not to use monkey jizz at the end of each paragraph.  Then, you limit vowel use.  It’s a slip…. well… you know.

In closing, it is ok if you don’t like gay marriage.  Same thing with not liking pickles on your burger.  I am FINE with you not liking gay marriage.  Just don’t butcher language and logic to do it.  Say “I don’t like it.”  or, “it’s gross and weird”, or “I am against it.”  Just know it is your issue, not theirs.

**** sorry, this got way too ranty.  It could, and should, be tightened up and probably cropped to about half the words.  I just get worked up.  I care about gay rights, and language.  So if they cross paths, I am going to write the shit out of it.  thanks for your patience.  I would like your feedback.  did it go too long?


seriously, what is the deal with Civil War re-enactment?

* update > this discussion really takes off down in the comments.  Comments are now closed

So, I was thinking.  December 7th is coming up, the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor base in Hawaii.  I think we should build a full scale replica of the USS Arizona.  Then, the morning of Dec 7th, we should dress up as Japanese pilots and blow it up.  Right smack dab in the middle of the Harbor.  Sound like a good idea?  Let’s dress up as grizzly bears and surprise Timothy Treadwell’s parents in the middle of the night.

On April 20th, we will gather at Columbine High School in South Denver and re-enact the killings that took place.  We’ll wear trench coats, and someone with a beard can play Dave Sanders.  He is the teacher who bled out and died while authorities waited three hours to enter the school.  We can eat food like people did back then, and stay in suburban tract houses.

I know, awesome, right?

On Sept 11th, we will make 1/3rd scale remote control airplanes.  We will set them on fire and fly them over the ground zero site into stuff.

Do you see the problem with all of this?  Do any of these look like a good idea to you?  Insenstive?  Cruel?  Sick?  You would be correct.   How is this any different from these folks who re-enact the Civil War? It’s no different, and nothing to celebrate in my eyes.  Our own country took up arms against itself.  Brothers had to fight each other to death.   This isn’t something to celebrate, nor is it something to re-enact.  How come nobody is re-enacting WW2?  Now that was an enemy worth fighting, and we won that one.  There are still people alive who lived through and fought through that.  You don’t see them hanging out in tent petting their muskets.  They fought so that they wouldn’t have to do that ever again.  It’s why you fight a war, to make shit better.

Also, why is it only the South seems to do the re-enacting?  Didn’t they lose?  Aren’t we glad they lost? Weren’t they proven wrong?  Did they not take up arms against the United States of America?  Doesn’t that make them terrorists?  Yes, it does and yes they are.

So, why are we romanticizing the civil war?  Were things so much better back then?  Nope.  Everything sucked back then.  The coffee was shit, the outfits were tacky, we spent all our resources killing off our own country, and torching anything left.  They (re-enactors… or ‘racists’ for short) seem to think that things were great back then.  It’s not just dumb, it’s offensive.  To celebrate the Civil War on the side of the South is to say that Blacks are property and the United States is the enemy.  If you are still of that mind set, I am thinking maybe you should gtfo.  Instead of re-enacting the Civil War, just buy a shirt that says “I hate black people” and save yourself the time and money of running around in a field pretending to be martyrs.

I will tell you what, confederate fans.  If you want to secede, this time we will let you.  Shit, I will help you pack.  Your values are not welcome here, nor will they be tolerated.

* comments are now closed