• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rev. Al Sharton announces his divorce

A

assemblage

Senior member
Al Sharpton, Wife Announce Separation

Nov 5, 6:46 PM (ET)

NEW YORK (AP) - The Rev. Al Sharpton and his wife, Kathy Jordan Sharpton, have announced their separation after 23 years of marriage. The Sharptons said in a statement Friday that they "will remain on the best of terms."

The pair "have extremely active careers and their separation allows them to continue pursuing their work interests," the statement said. "They will continue to work together in their civil rights work and in their other business ventures, including those in the entertainment industry."

"Together they have successfully raised two daughters, one of whom started college this year, and the other of whom will be graduating high school in June," the statement said.
Click to expand...
 
What a perversion of marriage if the two are separating because of convenience. Though, the article never mentioned "divorce", so I don't know what their separation entails.
 
Originally posted by: assemblage
Bush isn't banning divorce. Where did you hear that?
Click to expand...

It's using slippery slope logic (e.g. Homosexuality --> polygamy --> incest --> beastiality, etc) to come to the conclusion that (gay ban (sanctity of marriage) --> divorce ban (sanctity of marriage))
 
Originally posted by: assemblage
Al Sharpton, Wife Announce Separation

Nov 5, 6:46 PM (ET)

NEW YORK (AP) - The Rev. Al Sharpton and his wife, Kathy Jordan Sharpton, have announced their separation after 23 years of marriage. The Sharptons said in a statement Friday that they "will remain on the best of terms."

The pair "have extremely active careers and their separation allows them to continue pursuing their work interests," the statement said. "They will continue to work together in their civil rights work and in their other business ventures, including those in the entertainment industry."

"Together they have successfully raised two daughters, one of whom started college this year, and the other of whom will be graduating high school in June," the statement said.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Oh well. I guess after 23 years no one will be getting their fondue set back.
 
Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
Originally posted by: assemblage
Oh, sillypery slope is a fallacy though.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the guys that are saying we'll have to allow incest, beastility, and necrophilia when we let gays marry 😉
Click to expand...
Ahh that's the discrimiation argument. It goes like this. It's discriminatory to restrict marriage to a male and a female. Following that logic, then it would also be discrimatory to restrict marriage to male/female, male/male, or female/female. That means there is no restrictions on who can be married. Not sure if that's a slippery slope since it isn't a series of steps.

 
Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
Tell that to the guys that are saying we'll have to allow incest, beastility, and necrophilia when we let gays marry 😉
Click to expand...
This is not a slippery slope argument, only an argument against the position that everything should be allowed which doesn't forcefully harm anyone.
 
Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
Originally posted by: assemblage
Oh, sillypery slope is a fallacy though.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the guys that are saying we'll have to allow incest, beastility, and necrophilia when we let gays marry 😉
Click to expand...
Ok, bestiality and necrophilia bring in unwilling parties...but if the incest is between two willing adults, why is it invalid?

And yes, I am a proponent of gay marriage.
 
Originally posted by: jtusa4
They better hurry up and do it before Bush bans divorce! Isn't that right Geekbabe? :roll:
Click to expand...

This administration is very pro-family and quite interested in doing things which in their opinions will strengthen families.

Do you seriously think fundies approve of things like abortion, divorce,hetrosexuals co-habitating, pre-marital sex, alternate sexual practices, strip clubs, adult bookstores and online porn ?

Do you seriously think their agenda will stop with gays?
 
Actually slippery slope isn't a fallacy - but it's probably the trickiest argument to construct well because of the severe restrictions on how similar the steps need to be.

The result is that most attempts at slippery-slope argument turn out to be poorly constructed. Geekbabe was being facetious (at least, I suspect, about divorce), but the anti-gay lobby claims that gay marriage will lead to polygamous and bestial marriages is a particularly poor attempt at slippery-slope.
 
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Actually slippery slope isn't a fallacy - but it's probably the trickiest argument to construct well because of the severe restrictions on how similar the steps need to be.

The result is that most attempts at slippery-slope argument turn out to be poorly constructed. Geekbabe was being facetious (at least, I suspect, about divorce), but the anti-gay lobby claims that gay marriage will lead to polygamous and bestial marriages is a particularly poor attempt at slippery-slope.
Click to expand...

I listened to a killer interview on NPR, the argument of equal protection could be applied to polgamous marriage & it's a valid argument. As far as the slippery slope, it could also be extended to spinster sisters who live together, because if equal protection is limited to the physical act of sex, that makes no sense either.

Frankly, the incest thing is a little disturbing to me, but the old argument about inbred morons is invalid, it was disproven by line breeding of golden retriever guide dogs for the blind, which developed a hugely successful line of guide dogs.

I don't have a problem with any of it, I think the government needs to stay the hell out of relationships period, barring that, the status of marriage should be extended to any 2 consenting adults.

Anyway back on topic, Sharpton is an opportunistic POS, I'm sure he ran across a piece of ass while campaigning that he prefers over his wife.
 
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Frankly, the incest thing is a little disturbing to me, but the old argument about inbred morons is invalid, it was disproven by line breeding of golden retriever guide dogs for the blind, which developed a hugely successful line of guide dogs.
Click to expand...
Cool.

If you take the reproductive aspect out of it, how much more is there to argue with?

Besides, any children an incestuous couple could produce would be at least as viable as any a homosexual couple could produce.
 
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlieThe result is that most attempts at slippery-slope argument turn out to be poorly constructed. Geekbabe was being facetious (at least, I suspect, about divorce), but the anti-gay lobby claims that gay marriage will lead to polygamous and bestial marriages is a particularly poor attempt at slippery-slope.
Click to expand...
It is not a slippery-slope argument, as I said. It is a counterargument against an argument that would support all of those things.
 
Originally posted by: CSMR
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlieThe result is that most attempts at slippery-slope argument turn out to be poorly constructed. Geekbabe was being facetious (at least, I suspect, about divorce), but the anti-gay lobby claims that gay marriage will lead to polygamous and bestial marriages is a particularly poor attempt at slippery-slope.
Click to expand...
It is not a slippery-slope argument, as I said. It is a counterargument against an argument that would support all of those things.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

The gay marriage supporters in this thread don't understand that we're on their side, though 🙁
 
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Originally posted by: CSMR
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlieThe result is that most attempts at slippery-slope argument turn out to be poorly constructed. Geekbabe was being facetious (at least, I suspect, about divorce), but the anti-gay lobby claims that gay marriage will lead to polygamous and bestial marriages is a particularly poor attempt at slippery-slope.
Click to expand...
It is not a slippery-slope argument, as I said. It is a counterargument against an argument that would support all of those things.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

The gay marriage supporters in this thread don't understand that we're on their side, though 🙁
Click to expand...

I think you're arguing with the wrong thing (both of you). I just responded to the statement that slippery slope is invariably a fallacy, and illustrated it with the on-topic case of slippery slope being used to guarantee polygamous/bestial marriages would follow gay marriage if it were made legal.
 
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

The gay marriage supporters in this thread don't understand that we're on their side, though 🙁
Click to expand...

I think you're arguing with the wrong thing (both of you). I just responded to the statement that slippery slope is invariably a fallacy, and illustrated it with the on-topic case of slippery slope being used to guarantee polygamous/bestial marriages would follow gay marriage if it were made legal.[/quote]

He, he, here's the deal, the slippery slope will never extend to bestiality becasue animals do not have the right of equal protection under the constitution...

However a strong argument could be made for polygamous marriage using the equal protection clause.

That being said, I'm fine with polygamy as well as gay marriage.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top