Another “informed and compassionate” response from the happy elves at Crisis Magazine:

You want contraception; someone else wants easy divorce. You want easy divorce; someone else wants homosexual marriages. You want homosexual marriages; someone else wants threesomes. You want threesomes; someone else wants children. You want children; someone else wants sheep. And his reason for wanting sheep will be just as good as yours for wanting contraception or easy divorce or homosexual marriages.

You heard it here, folks:

Using condoms leads to sex with sheep.

I took this paragraph from an article entitled Gay Marriage and the Slippery Slope to Polyamory.

“Slippery Slope” is an interesting choice of words.  I use this term with my Philosophy 101 students at Utica College.  The “Slippery Slope” is an example of what we call an “informal fallacy” (i.e. an error in the logical process).

This next paragraph is taken from the textbook I use with that class:

Sometimes people argue that performing a specific action will inexorably lead to an additional bad action (or actions), so you should not perform the first action.  An initial wrong step starts an inevitable slide toward an unpleasant result that could have been avoided if only the first step had never been taken.  This way of arguing is legitimate if there is good reason to believe that the chain of actions must happen as alleged.  If not, it is an example of the fallacy of slippery slope.

So, before you go looking for a hot date in a barnyard, remember that questioning one boundary does not necessarily mean eliminating all boundaries.