Monday, September 2, 2013

Not all slippery slope arguments are wrong

Generally speaking, I avoid "slippery slope" arguments. A slippery slope argument is when you argue that action A is wrong because it is the first step down a path which will end in an action Z which everyone sees as wrong. They are--rightly so--considered logically fallacious.

For example, "If I do it for one person, I have to do it for everyone," is a commonly-given slippery slope argument. Or, "If we allow illegal aliens to have amnesty, then everyone else will come in and we'll be overrun in no time." Or, "If we start calling Christmas, 'Happy Holidays', then it will set off a chain reaction and before long we won't even be able to have church on Sundays!" These arguments are generally seen as unacceptable arguments because they do not try and disprove something on its own merits, but rather on what future evil might come from it.

However, there are times when a slippery slope argument is helpful and perfectly acceptable. There have been times when step A does in fact lead to step B and to step C rather quickly. (Indeed, if you think about it, it would be very hard--and quite possibly rather stupid--to limit our decision making to only the step immediately in front of us, without considering impact to other things!)

One of the key questions is: how many links are there between action A and action Z, and how likely is each step? For example, if you try and tell me that restricting handgun use will eventually lead to the government oppressing us Big-Brother style, I'm going to call you on a slippery slope fallacy: there are too many steps, and they are too unlikely, for A-Z to be a valid proposition.

Sometimes, though, A-B-C is in fact rather obvious and clear. And we are seeing that today, with the redefinition of marriage and sexuality.

About sixty years ago, the sexual revolution told everyone that sex was all fun and games and should be freely enjoyed, regardless of marriage.

About fifty years ago, the divorce rates began to spike to their current, never-before-recorded levels--a direct result of the free-sexual lifestyle.

Over the past sixty years, STDs, abortions, unwanted pregnancies, out-of-wedlock births, and sex outside of marriage have expanded dramatically.

In the past ten years, homosexuality has become so mainstream as to be widely acceptable.

In the past two years, marriage has been redefined to include homosexuals as equally valid to historical, heterosexual marriages.

See the slippery slope? There it is. And guys, we're still on it. And to see what's waiting for us, let's look at those who accepted homosexuality a few years before we did:

  • Germany is allowing parents to choose neither male nor female on birth certificates, so that later the child may choose which gender they "feel" the most like.
  • Incest is already legal in France, Spain, and Portugal, and Romania is now considering decriminalizing it as well.
  • Bestiality is legal in Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, and Sweden, as long as no harm comes to the animal.
  • Some in the States are already arguing that gay marriage sets the precedence which should be used for polygamy (see also here).

Recognize those things above? Add in a divorce rate of about 1 in 3, a fornication before marriage rate of nearly 96%, and LGBT sex, and you have basically the entire sexual code of Judaism being broken on a daily basis in America and Europe. (Oh, and don't forget the fact that America is the host of 60% of all Internet pornography in the entire world, despite being only 4% of the world's population.)

It is not a false argument to say that one will lead to other: the slippery slope is not a fallacy when the enabling of situation A creates a legally-binding precedent to support the others...particularly when other countries have walked the exact same path a decade or so ago.

Now that we have joined Europe in same sex marriage approval, we need only look at other European sexual ethics show us what we have in store for us. This is the future of America. Heaven help us.

No comments:

Post a Comment