During a recent appearance at New England College, an audience member asked presidential candidate Rick Santorum a question regarding gay marriage. Instead of answering the question, Santorum argued that persons who support legalizing gay marriage must justify why polygamy would not follow from the legalization of gay marriage. Is Santorum's concern about polygamy following from the legalization of gay marriage justified? Must proponents of same-sex marriage argue why polygamy would not follow from the legalization of same-sex marriage?
Following the question about gay marriage from an audience member, Santorum asked, “What about three men?” and said “If it makes three people happy to get married based on what you just said, what makes that wrong and what you've said right?”
The audience member explained to Santorum that she was not talking about marriage with three people, but Santorum kept mentioning this and said, “It's important if we're going to have a discussion based on rational, reasoned thought that we employ reason. Reason says that if you think it's okay for two, then you have to differentiate with me as to why it's not okay with three.” Santorum continued to say that if gay marriage were legalized, then marriage really means “whatever you want it to mean.”
The structure of this reasoning is what philosophers call 'the slippery slope.' When one action is taken, the person reasons, various consequences would soon follow. For persons to successfully argue in this manner, they need to establish why this is the case. Santorum, in this appearance, fails to do so.
If, for instance, all states were to define marriage as 'a contract between two consenting adults granting benefits x, y and z,' polygamy would not follow because a new argument would have to be raised as to why the definition would change from two consenting adults to more than two consenting adults.
Suppose persons were arguing that marijuana should be legalized in all states. A person, disagreeing with this sentiment, could say, “What about cocaine?” The 'move' that is happening here is very similar to the reasoning Santorum employs; Santorum wants the person who supports legalizing same-sex marriage to justify why polygamy would not follow and the person who is opposed to legalization of marijuana wants the person to justify why legalization of cocaine would not follow. In both cases, a new issue is raised instead of discussion surrounding the original issue.
If same-sex marriage between two consenting adults were to be legalized, it is not at all clear that polygamy and/or any type of marriage which would make individuals happy, as Santorum suggests, would follow. Persons who argue for legalization of same-sex marriage need not justify why same-sex marriage would not lead to legalization of polygamy. Both issues are distinct and an argument for polygamy – something much different than marriage between two individuals – would need to be made in order for polygamy to be legalized.
Comments