Debra Baty
The slippery slope fallacy is an argument that claims an initial event or action will trigger a series of other events and lead to an extreme or undesirable outcome. The slippery slope fallacy anticipates this chain of events without offering any evidence to substantiate the claim.[1]
We’re past the “fallacy” mark when it comes to sexual orientation ideology. Equating sexual desires, temptations, and behaviors to a permanent part of personhood is leading to rather dark and confusing places in society, sorry to say. Here we’ll review yet more evidence to substantiate this claim.
Polycules
In August the TV show called “Riverdale” featured a surprise as it released the final episode – the four lead characters (Archie, Jughead, Betty, and Veronica – yes, based off of the old comic book series) ended up in a polyamorous relationship, also known as a “polycule.” A Dec. 2022 article entitled, “What’s a polycule? An expert on polyamory explains this relationship”[2] explains:
This truth in Proverbs is important enough that Solomon repeats the exact verbiage in chapter 14 & 16. Clearly, this is a truth worth driving home… there are countless ways men, women and young people make foolish and destructive decisions based upon what seems right in the moment.
This faulty thinking can be traced all the way back to Adam and Eve’s original disobedience to God in the Garden of Eden. Even there, before sin saturated nearly every aspect of humanity, a decision was made. A decision based not on what God clearly stated, but on what “seemed right” regardless of what God said.
Naturally, the world doesn’t care about God’s laws. Many don’t even believe in the reality of a personal God who created all things, let alone a God who gave His life to redeem hopelessly fallen humanity. The real issue isn’t the perspective of the unchurched and non-believers. Rather, the far greater concern is so many are living according to “a way that seems right” to them, even as professed Christ-followers.
The examples are endless, but certainly compromise made in the inordinate pursuit of: pleasure, comfort, money, careers, retirement planning, following feelings, personal happiness, sex, and identity are a few of the many ways we set ourselves on a path leading toward death because we reject God’s way for what feels right to us.
As our understanding of and value for God’s laws diminish, we functionally consider ourselves to be more enlightened and “nicer” than God. So we make compromises for ourselves and others that often seem small at the time, frequently giving way to cumulative or major sudden life-choices that are a total departure from God’s intention and outside of His protective boundaries.
When this happens, we engage in the same distorted thinking and reasoning as Eve. We observe the “fruit” before us (whatever that might be). Satan, the world, and our own flesh reason that “it” seems good (Genesis 3:6) and we depart the narrow path of life for the wide path of destruction and death. Sadly, in our deluded condition we often influence others to join us on this path that promises wisdom, fun, and freedom, but actually leads to bondage.
Setting aside the many areas we as purported Christ-followers and regular church-attendeee ignore the lordship of Christ in our lives and abandon The Narrow Way, this particular blog post is addressing one primary area: cohabitation.
In 2019 Pew Research reported that 58% of white evangelicals approved of cohabitation if the couple intended to get married.
According an article at www.probe.org/cohabitation “Cohabitation, as a lifestyle, is on the rise. Consider the significant growth in cohabitation rates in the last few decades. In 1960 and 1970, about a half million were living together. But by 1980 that number was 1.5 million. By 1990 the number was nearly three million. And by 2000 the number was almost five million.
Researchers estimate that today as many as 50% of Americans cohabit at one time or another prior to marriage. The stereotype of two young, childless people living together is not completely accurate; currently, some 40% of cohabiting relationships involve children.”
I have a friend who regularly attends church, participates in Bible-studies, and highly values connecting with other Christians for support and mutual encouragement. She gave her all to an abusive first marriage, doing everything she knew to walk out her commitment and vows. When she discovered that her husband was committing adultery repeatedly she separated from him for a significant amount of time. With his apparent repentance and commitment to work on their marriage, supported by positive actions on his part over time, she returned home in hopes of participating in the much needed growth and development of a far better marriage.
Unfortunately, he did not have the same level of commitment, and as bad as the first 10 years of their marriage was, the years that followed were far worse, including more adultery. Eventually, she left the marriage and divorced her husband. She was devastated, to say the least, and needed time and counseling.
Eventually, without any intention of pursuing a relationship she became friends with a Christian guy, which led to a romantic connection. This brought about a dilemma. My friend had been so emotionally and mentally abused and violated, she was totally afraid of the prospect of ever marrying again. She also didn’t want to put her kids or herself through another failed marriage. She and her boyfriend wound up crossing sexual boundary lines. After that behavior continued for months, it didn’t seem like a big deal for him to move in, with the idea that it wouldn’t be long before they would “tie the knot”.
It’s been 4 or 5 years. They attend church together and seemingly have a life and family together, but with no actual commitment. Her boyfriend wants to get married, but there are still so many areas of unprocessed pain and fear it’s just been easier for my friend to stay where she’s at – living a life of cohabitation, disconnecting from God and her own conscience in this area and ignoring the impact her behavior is having on her now adult children, who are great young men and women, but care nothing for Christianity. Her witness for Christ and her inner peace have been compromised.
In most cases though, cohabitation isn’t about unresolved or avoided trauma from a previous marriage. It’s simply convenient; a way to save money, a way to “test drive” the guy or girl before saying “I do”. But this is a complete disregard for the institution of covenant marriage originated by God.
At www.crosswalk.com an article entitled, “Cohabitation and divorce - - is there a correlation?” stated the following: A 2010 "meta-analysis" looked at 26 peer-reviewed, published studies that followed various couples over time. This analysis found that marrieds who had cohabiting pasts were more likely to face divorce, and that "noncohabitors seem to have more confidence in the future of their relationship, and have less accepting attitudes toward divorce.
Hebrews 13:4 is frank and clear, “Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators [those who have sex before marriage] and adulterers [those who have sex with someone other than their spouse after marriage] God will judge.”
A few years ago a friend confided in me that he was completely baffled by his 12-step program leader. He had been part of a popular Christian recovery program in a local church for more than a year, working out his own substance abuse issues. He had recently learned that his leader was living with his girlfriend, but according to the leader they weren’t having sex.
While it is possible (though highly unlikely) they were not having sex, is that all that matters in whether or not couples are cohabitating? Aside from the fact that sexual sin is far more likely when we are living and sleeping under the same roof, how does this impact those who look to us as a shepherd or mentor? Either this will generate mistrust (as it should), undermine the leader’s character, or it may embolden others to live out the same practice, usually without any effective boundaries to guard against sexual sin.
1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 says “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every appearance of evil”. Avoiding or delaying marriage and cohabitating instead may seem like wisdom, but it’s definitely not godly wisdom.
Staying on the narrow path with God and trusting His many commands to avoid sexual immorality are both good and for our flourishing, leads toward fulfillment, joy, and life. Let’s choose life, rather than momentary pleasure accompanied by severe long-term consequences.
People have been living in families that include more than two adults forever. H in Somerville, families sometimes look like one man and one woman, but sometimes it looks like two people everyone on the block thinks are sisters because they’ve lived together forever, or sometimes it’s an aunt and an uncle, or an aunt and two uncles, raising two kids.
This is simply allowing that change, allowing people to say, ‘This is my partner a this is my other partner,’” he said. “It has a legal bearing, so when one of them is sick, they can both go to the hospital.”**
Earlier this year, Councilor Scott introduced more legislation written by activists…
Somerville City Council on Thursday, March 23, ordinances amending section 1of the Code of Ordinance to add definitions for relationship status and intimate personal relationships and amending section 2-326 of the Code of Ordinances, related to the Personnel program were brought forward and passed by the Council A statement issued by the Council explained the ordinances in detail:
Somerville City Council just made history by passing groundbreaking nondiscrimination ordinances protecting polyamorous families and relationships. Th ordinances make Somerville the first city in the United States to extend explicit legal protections to polyamorous and other non-nuclear families and relationships.
The ordinance, introduced by City Councilor At-Large Willie Burnley and Councilor JT Scott, prohibits discrimination in employment, policing, and more based on one’s family and relationship structure. The ordinances protect diverse families and intimate relationships in the city, including multi-partner/multi-par families and relationships, step-families, multi-generational households, nonnuclear family structures, consensually non-monogamous relationships, and consensual sexual and/or intimate relationships, including asexual and aromantic relationships.
The ordinances were drafted by lawyers and activists at the Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition, a project of Chosen Family Law Center and Harvard Law School’s LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic. Somerville previously partnered with these organizations to pass their multi-partner domestic partnership ordinance in Somerville in 2020, as well as Cambridge and Arlington, MA in 2021. Similar non-discrimination laws and plural domestic partnership laws based on their model ordinances have been introduced on the west coast and are expected to pass this year. [Emphasis mine][1]
You’ll notice there are quite the variety of relationships being bundled in with polyamory. “Step-families” and “multi-generational households” are rather commo Comparing them with “asexual and aromantic relationships,” not to mention “consensually non-monogamous relationships,” is a stretch. We already have terms “asexual/aromantic relationships” – they are called friendships, and are not the equivalent to marriage. The boldness of the reporting noting that activists and thei lawyers wrote the drafts for this legislation – not as a response to a need raised by th citizens of the city, but as a means of engineering change – blew my mind. It wasn’t surprising to see their efforts extended to the west coast of the US. The article goes on:
…. “As a polyamorous person, I’m grateful to live in a city that embraces rather that punishes people based on their family or relationship structure,” said Somerville Council member Willie Burnley Jr., who introduced the ordinance. “The protection we extend today not only cement Somerville’s legislative leadership and legacy on non-monogamous rights, they ensure that our neighbors know that they live in a community where they can be who they are freely and love whom they love open without fear of government interference.”
Whoa – no one is being “punished” for being in a friendship, or a family with stepsiblings, or living with their grandparents. Nor is anyone wanting to sleep with multiple people being “punished.” Of course people are free to do this – the government isn’t interfering with this practice. There is no evidence of that happening. What is being advocated for is special protections based on identities surrounding one’s sexual desires. A legal representative and activist was then quoted:
Again, we see vague claims of discrimination without sufficient details provided ab these cases. Was it “stigma” or a valid concern about a child being raised in an environment with a adults having multiple partners in and out of the home? And what kind of job was this individual fired from? What was the circumstance in which the mentioned their sexual practices at work? And is there such a thing as “being polyamorous”? What is the legal / clinical definition of this term? Isn’t this a status anyone can claim – how do we substantiate it, as we can with a marriage?
The article went on to list a number of organizations backing this legislation:
Again, we find our inherent worth as being created in the image of God. Without this foundation, we see this example of people seeking to redefine our existence and our essential attributes. People are valuable, created and loved by God. But these “polyamorous” relationships are not inherently valuable – they are created out of “the incredibly messy web” Michael W. Hannon described in his essay in 2013:
[1] https://www.thesomervilletimes.com/archives/123139
[2] https://medium.com/@dr.schechinger/a-historic-step-forward-for-polyamorous-and-non-normative-families-the-impact-of-somervilles-8009c6db5766
[3] https://firstthings.com/sexual-disorientation-the-trouble-with-talking-about-gayness/