I’m sure there’s some more mature ways for me to address gay pride, but since I, like most men, have a 12-year-old boy just under the surface, and almost everything sexual for me ultimately inspires thoughts of lubrication (natural or otherwise, and regardless of gender combo), let’s talk about hot, wet slippery slopes. Or, more specifically, that slippery slope that begins with allowing same-sex marriages and ends with the legalization of the right to marry a honey badger, the collapse of the family structure, God-delivered natural disasters that wipe out whole states, and finally, the election of a Jersey Shore cast member to the U.S. presidency.

Or so I’m told by sources in the know at the Christian Coalition and the Tea Party.

While the month of June (it being June 11 as I write this) and various gay pride events therein, is certainly part of what has me thinking of same-sex marriage rights, a lot of it is also the fact that my state had an initiative on the ballot not that long ago to allow people with the same sexual parts to enter wedded bliss (or misery, depending on your opinion of marriage and experience with it personally) and, well, it got shot down. It was a close fight, but the naysayers won out. Plus, a guy came to my door just a few days ago to ask me for my opinion on advertising and campaigns opposed to same-sex marriage, and my opinion on the notion of letting Joe marry Peter or Theresa marrying Hannah.

My opinion: Hell, yeah! Why not? If a couple of grown folks want to try to spend the rest of their lives together, let ‘em. Besides, we need some area of growth in the economy right now, so why not the wedding industry?

But ohmigod…my toes just felt the first hint of Vaseline on the sidewalk, or silicone lube on the asphalt, or…and is that a downward incline of approximately a 15-degree angle? Aaiiiiieeee!

Yes, the slippery slope. Well, the immoral sexual relationship and unholy marriage one, anyway. It runs parallel to the slippery drug use slope, on which use of marijuana inevitably leads to cocaine and then to heroin and on to crystal meth and then to snorting drain cleaner. (If that slope is so slippery, by the way, why have most of my several uncles failed to graduate from pot yet, in all my 43 years of life? Hmmm.)

But actually, all (or at least some) snark aside, the slippery slope concept is worth considering. Because as with so many things in life, one thing often does lead to another, and acceptance of certain things can lead to acceptance of other things (good, bad or neutral). So, to what other milestones might same-sex marriage lead, if we finally see widespread implementation of laws that allow people to marry within their own gender?

But First, a Word from the Historians

Admittedly, I’m not a historian, but I dream of playing one on TV, and I’ve been known to read books and pay attention to things like, oh…reality. Before we get on to slippery slopes down which we will slide nude and screeching after gays and lesbians are allowed to marry, let’s look at the fine institution of heterosexual marriage and how it has never changed…oh, wait, it has?!

Look, the notion of two opposite-gender folks falling in love and getting married isn’t really traditional, historically speaking. If you want to get historical, people ended up in marriages arranged by older relatives (and in many parts of the world still do), or because it was convenient and necessary. Parents felt the need to unload their girls, which were often considered a drain on the family, and guys felt the need to build up their families for variety of reasons (often related to survival or economics), and so the two got matched up. That’s not to say that no one ever married for love in the ancient world or learned to love their partner—I’m sure it was a frequent occurrence. But marriage was not created originally to serve the needs of love, but to serve as a social contract and, in many cases, a property transfer (my daughter becomes your wife). The emphasis on the warm and fuzzy stuff developed very slowly over time.

Certainly, one can argue that “marriage values” took a hit with the arrival of more easily accessible divorce, but then again, that also enabled a large number of women to get away from ass-hats to whom they would have been tethered to for life in another era (while the men could probably spin around thrice, spit on the ground and say “I’m done with ye” to get rid of a wife in many eras past). And while divorce rates are admittedly high, people continue to get married and remarried, including an awful lot of the “family values” politicians out there. So the tradition of marriage remains alive and well, and like so many social constructs, has evolved even with the perceived horror that was “easy” divorce. And marriage will (and should) evolve to embrace same-sex couples throughout the United States and many other nations eventually.

Now, back to sliding down the KY-frosted steep hill.

Legalized Pedophilia

Why don’t we dispense with one of the most deeply crimson-hued of red herrings in the same-sex marriage slippery slope debate: That it will lead to acceptance and perhaps legalization of sexual activity with minors, and perhaps even the ability to marry children.

First off, I’m not gay—I’m not even bisexual—and even I’m deeply offended at the tendency to associate child sexual abuse with homosexuality. The two things aren’t on the same page. They’re not even in the same book. I’m pretty sure they aren’t even on the same shelf—and perhaps not even in the same ZIP code. The only thing they share is sexual contact, but that’s also true of geriatric sex and raping kids, and you can’t get much farther away from each other than those two.

Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is about consensual sex between adults. Sure, youth can engage in both flavors of sex, too, but they generally do it with each other, so it’s the same difference. Pedophilia, however, is about lusting after or abusing humans who are immature, easily misled, often helpless (at least relatively so) and not of the age of consent. Homosexuality is an orientation; pedophilia is a crime.

What I find absolutely hilarious (as well as tragic and scary) about the Bible-thumpers and others who decry homosexuality and say acceptance of it will lead to pedophilia, is that they actually should be arguing in favor of marrying children off to adults. I mean, that’s pretty historically accepted prior to the modern age, and is very, very much in line with biblical-era traditions.

Thankfully, traditions of marrying off children is not the normal way of things in the country where I live, nor any country where I might want to live in the future, and I can pretty much promise that legalization of same-sex marriage won’t lead to societal support of pedophilia. Unless, of course, we go back to having an average lifespan of 30-something to 40-something years, in which case I imagine child brides (and sometimes grooms) will very much come back into vogue.

Polygamy

“If you let gays and lesbians marry, then next we’ll be seeing legalization of plural marriage,” some folks cry.

Well, they might be right, though the notion of a married pair is pretty ingrained in us culturally in the United States and the clear majority of other nations too, I suspect. So, I don’t know that there would be a huge groundswell of people who would want polygamy legalized, in the same way that many gays and lesbians—and straight, bi and transgender folks, for that matter—are calling out for marriage equality with regard to gender.

To be honest, same-sex marriage is probably a prerequisite for legalization of polygamy, as in modern-day society, there will be an assumption—often correct—that members of the plural marriage who share the same gender will need to have legal status with one another and not just with the opposite-gender partner(s). I don’t see polygamy being legalized in the U.S., for example, and everyone standing idly by while it is structured in patriarchal style alone, with one man and many wives, and all the legal status through him. A little too old-world to fly by the female voters and progressive male ones.

In any case, as one half of a marriage now entering into the polyamory and/or swinging communities, I don’t find anything particularly wrong with plural marriage, except that I think it could be a legal nightmare in terms of divorce, parental rights, inheritance and the like. Those sorts of complications are about the only valid argument I can see why this would even be a bad destination on the so-called slippery slope. And I prefer to think of those complications as challenges to be overcome, rather than stopping points.

But while there may be some tie-in and overlap between same-sex marriage and plural marriage, they really are two different issues.

Legalized Bestiality

I don’t hear this argument often, but there are people who think that the more gays and lesbians get footholds in society (hate crime protections, social acceptance, and perhaps one day full marriage benefits), the closer we get to women laying down with beasts, and men marrying goats and sheep.

If homosexuality and pedophilia are in different ZIP codes, homosexuality and bestiality are in different states—perhaps different nations. But one key common point is that, just as with pedophilia, a key issue is consent or, rather, lack thereof. Animals, like children, don’t have consent they can legally give, really—they don’t even have words to express what they want or what they don’t. So, it’s a non-issue, and there is no direct line or even logical circuitous path between same-sex marriage and acceptable or legalization of bestiality.

Besides, marrying your dog, gerbil, ferret or leopard gecko? They can’t even manage estates so inheritance laws alone would make legalization of cross-species unions pretty unlikely—so improbable, in fact, that it shouldn’t even be in the arguments and debates.

Incestuous Marriage

First comes same-gender nookie and marriage, and then brothers and sisters, mothers and sons, fathers and daughters and all sorts of other “keep it in the family” unions will follow.

Maybe. Maybe not. But even if it were so, I frankly can’t work up much energy to say “No! Never!”

Consenting adults, remember? If two grown folks are first-order relatives and want to get it on, shouldn’t that be their choice? Who are we to judge or choose for them? Besides, there is historical precedent for such unions going back millennia.

Look, I may find the notion personally repellant from a deeply ingrained sense of moral opposition to incest, but I’m not going to judge others in terms of who they pick to love among the many adult choices available. I can’t feel right with it in my own life, but I respect other adults’ decisions amongst themselves. I’ve read some really hot sibling-on-sibling erotica in the past, though in real life, I don’t know that I could even kiss one of my hot cousins, much less do something with my sister (if I had one). But that’s me. After all, I also wouldn’t marry a guy, but I would like for my gay friends to have that option with each other if they desire it.

About the only thing I can say that I would strongly argue, in terms of incestuous marriage limitations, would be that if they were made legal, there should be a high age threshold (say, the youngest person in the proposed marriage needs to be 25 or older) in the case of a parent-child marriage. There are issues of power and influence, and the marriage of a parent to someone still in their teens or shortly after them might involve coercion and manipulation of the sort that anyone else, even a sibling, would be hard-pressed to match.

Also, you can’t even really bring in the “two-headed babies” argument here again incest, because we don’t prohibit people from procreating when they are highly likely to pass on genetically inherited disorders. Even if two non-related adults had genes that made it a 50-50 chance their kids would get some nasty problem, we don’t get to tell them they can’t get married and have kids.

So, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that incest is best, but it theoretically could be something along the slippery slope, and I doubt society would crumble as a result. However, it’s not something we’re likely to see for a very, very, VERY long time. Think of the social stigma that revolves around incest. People don’t even feel comfortable most of the time coming out as being poly, many gays and lesbians still remain closeted, and kinksters often won’t admit their fetishes even to spouses. How much less likely, then, that people will admit to incest and champion the cause of first-order-relative marriages? So unlikely, and so small a population, that I just don’t see it anywhere in the foreseeable future.

Conclusion

OK, so yes, there is a marriage slip-and-slide potentially, and some areas that might gain steam if same-sex marriage became normalized. But even so, I don’t know how much we can really make a cause-and-effect with legalizing same-sex marriage and any other alternative/non-traditional marriage choices being accepted. Were things like polygamy and incestuous marriages, for example, to become accepted, I think it would have much more to do with society letting adults make adult decisions rather than to any precedent set by gays and lesbians.

The fact is that same-sex marriage would be exactly the same as traditional marriage, except for the gender mix. Given that we promise men and women the same basic rights and pretty much allow them to do all the same things (a few exceptions aside) here in my home nation of the United States, it seems pretty damn stupid if we don’t make marriage something between one adult and one adult, instead of one man and one woman.

As many have said, and rightly so, the sky will not fall if gays and lesbians get married. The only thing that will change in society, is that those people will be married. It hurts no one, takes nothing away from anyone, and doesn’t fundamentally alter the structure of our lives and our ability to carry out day-to-day activities.

So, in short, it’s time. If we find there is a slippery slope thereafter, I have a feeling it will be a lot less slick and a lot less steep than the conservative Chicken Littles are predicting.