Slippery Dope: O'Reilly, others on Fox News warn of "triads" with legalization of same-sex marriage
SUMMARY: In recent days, Fox News hosts have repeatedly warned that the legalization of same-sex marriage could lead to the eventual legalization of polyamorous marriage.
In recent days, Fox News has repeatedly warned that the legalization of same-sex marriage could lead to the eventual legalization of polyamorous marriage. For example, a May 7 headline on Fox News' website FoxNation.com stated, "Are 'Triad' Marriages Next?" under an image of a rainbow flag. The headline linked to New York Times columnist Abby Ellin's May 7 article for The Daily Beast on the polyamorous community, which reported that the World Polyamory Association "is pushing for the next frontier of less-traditional codified relationships. This community has even come up with a name for what the rest of the world generally would call a committed threesome: the 'triad.' " Since then, several Fox News hosts -- including Bill O'Reilly, Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Glenn Beck -- have echoed The Fox Nation's suggestion that same-sex marriage will lead to "Triad" marriages. For example:
- During the May 11 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly again claimed gay marriage would lead to the legalization of polyamorous marriage, saying, "I had said from the jump if you OK gay marriage, then you have to do plural marriage, which is now -- has a name, triads. Three people getting married." After stating that the "World Polygamy [sic] Association ... want to be married," O'Reilly asked Republican strategist Margaret Hoover, "So number one, I'm an oracle, and number two, how can you deny them under equal protection under the law?" In response, Hoover said, "I think it is extremely disingenuous for you to suggest that, if you allow gay people to get married ... that polygamy is then going to run rampant across the United States."
- Echoing O'Reilly's comments, on the May 12 edition of Fox & Friends, Doocy teased an upcoming segment on polyamorous relationships by stating, "Gay marriage on the march; five states now approving it. But what about Americans who want to marry multiple partners at the same time? Do they have marital rights, too? The threesomes who now want the legal right to get hitched."
- Later on the May 12 Fox & Friends, Carlson stated: "While gay activists continue to fight for same-sex marriage rights, a new group demanding legal recognition. They call themselves polyamorists, and they want the right to marry into a triad, otherwise known as a threesome. Is this crossing the line, and how far will we take this?" During the segment, while discussing her open relationship with her husband and her girlfriend, author Jenny Block said, "[A] lot of people want the legal protection of having all three people married. And, in my mind, marriage is a civil institution, and so if people want that choice, I feel like they should be allowed that." Carlson then said, "Glenn, I know you disagree with this," and asked Focus on the Family's Glenn Stanton to "[s]peak from the side of traditional values with regard to marriage and where you think this may be heading as far as a slippery slope." Stanton responded:
Well, it is a slippery slope. And the idea is, if you think about the argument that these people made for the radical kinds of marriage that they want, they are exactly the same kind of arguments -- justice, equality, things like that -- that the same-sex marriage people have made.
And we have said for a long time that same-sex marriage would open a Pandora's box that would lead us to who knows where. It's not just about triads; it's about four, five, six people. I mean, go on the websites and look at some of these organizations, and you see pictures of five people, six people. So it's not -- I mean, where does this stop?
And it's an amazing thing. And the point is that monogamy is a very, very important social value. We have to understand that cultures that fail to recognize and support the idea of monogamy end up to be cultures where women are things merely to be collected and used and thrown away at the end, not seen as full citizens. And that's why monogamy -- that's why monogamy is an important idea, and these people don't like it. [emphasis added]
- On the May 12 broadcast of his radio program, Glenn Beck teased a segment to air during that day's edition of his Fox News show, stating, "Tonight, 5 o'clock on the Fox News Channel, you don't want to miss a second -- new triad marriages." Beck added, "I believe somebody said about five years ago, 'Oh, look, polygamy is gonna happen.' Oh, my gosh, it was me. We'll give you the details on that coming up and at 5 tonight on the Fox News Channel."
From the May 12 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
CARLSON: Now for a very interesting debate: While gay activists continue to fight for same-sex marriage rights, a new group demanding legal recognition. They call themselves polyamorists, and they want the right to marry into a triad, otherwise known as a threesome.
Is this crossing the line, and how far will we take this? Jenny Block is happily married to her husband -- and her girlfriend doesn't mind at all. She's the author of Open: Love and Sex and Life in an Open Marriage. Also with us, Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family. Good morning to both of you.
BLOCK: Good morning.
STANTON: Good morning.
CARLSON: All right, Jenny, so a lot of people are trying to wrap their head around this concept, that the triad concept, I guess in your mind and explanation, this is the new marriage, or is it not?
BLOCK: Well, I think it's one way to do marriage. I mean, I think this conversation is really about honesty and about choice. Marriage as we know it now doesn't have the best success rate, as you know. And so this is just another way of doing this. There are all different kinds of families, and I think that's a good thing.
CARLSON: All right, so help me understand how this works. You are married to your husband. You have a girlfriend on the side. And you want to all be legally recognized together as a triad?
BLOCK: Well, to be honest, in my situation -- I can really only speak to mine -- I'm very happy with being married to my husband and having a girlfriend as well. But a lot of people want the legal protection of having all three people married. And, in my mind, marriage is a civil institution, and so if people want that choice, I feel like they should be allowed that.
CARLSON: Glenn, I know you disagree with this.
STANTON: Yeah.
CARLSON: Speak from the side of traditional values with regard to marriage and where you think this may be heading as far as a slippery slope.
STANTON: Well, it is a slippery slope. And the idea is, if you think about the argument that these people made for the radical kinds of marriage that they want, they are exactly the same kind of arguments -- justice, equality, things like that -- that the same-sex marriage people have made.
And we have said for a long time that same-sex marriage would open a Pandora's box that would lead us to who knows where. It's not just about triads; it's about four, five, six people. I mean, go on the websites and look at some of these organizations, and you see pictures of five people, six people. So it's not -- I mean, where does this stop?
And it's an amazing thing. And the point is that monogamy is a very, very important social value. We have to understand that cultures that fail to recognize and support the idea of monogamy end up to be cultures where women are things merely to be collected and used and thrown away at the end, not seen --
BLOCK: Gretchen -- Gretchen, I'm sorry. I have to --
STANTON: -- as full citizens. And that's why monogamy --
CARLSON: Yup.
STANTON: -- that's why monogamy is an important idea, and these people don't like it.
CARLSON: Right, Glenn, and I wish that I had another three hours to discuss this, because it needs it. But Jenny, I'll give you the final word on it.
BLOCK: Well, again, I just don't see any slippery slope. The fact that I could love more than one person does not mean that my neighbor is going to want to marry his dog. I mean, in the end this is about love and choice, and this isn't going anywhere but equality for everyone. And, as far as I'm concerned, equality is a wonderful thing.
CARLSON: All right. No doubt, as I said earlier, people have a variety of opinions on this issue, and it's something that we will continue to revisit.
From the May 12 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:
BECK: Tonight, 5 o'clock on the Fox News Channel, you don't want to miss a second -- new triad marriages. We're going to get into that here in just a second. I believe -- I believe somebody said about five years ago, "Oh, look, polygamy is gonna happen." Oh, my gosh, it was me. We'll give you the details on that coming up and at 5 tonight on the Fox News Channel.
I guess we could think of this as the secularization of bigotry.
The issue with warrantless wiretapping was that there was no way of knowing who was being eavesdropped on. Obviously oversight exists to prevent abuse, so that's not a slippery slope. If it was, then we would forget about oversight in all sorts of areas because it couldn't reasonably be thought to lead to any problems. And yet, that's not how things actually are, for some strange reason.
A slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy by definition and your post was a fine example of ANOTHER logical fallacy known as the false equivalence
Leave it to Fox to try to give legitimacy to more fringe groups.
What would stop me from marrying my dog? Or my cat?
What would stop people from marrying their brother or sister?
And so on and so forth. It's pretty mainstream around where i live. Or should say, lived.
It isn't about sex, it is about companionship
I have an active imagination, but I've never in my life had thoughts about the things they come up with, and have never known anyone, until this bunch, who did.
I like it a lot more when people take the incest or polygamy road with me.I usually get on record as not supporting or condoning either, but while I might find them unappealing, I don't think it's any of the government's bizness if somebody wants to marry their sibling or their golf foursome.Then I ask the conservative how much they'd like their taxes increased to pay for the incest police.
As to 'triad' marriage, I don't think it is likely they would gain any kind of legal recognition in this century. The legal and human rights reasons to support same-sex marriage is to give one specific individual default status as you're next of kin. Recognizing triads would would give this recognition to two individuals, which immediately raises a problem if there is any kind of disagreement between those two individuals. If you are on life support in a hospital, who will get to decide whether to pull the plug? This is not a decision to be made by a committee.
It could be worked out, of course, if enough people demanded it and were willing to pay for it, but morality doesn't even enter into the equation.
And that's precisely why the legal system would be forced to recognize a hierarchy of spouses. The order which is inherent to polygamy, first wife, second wife, third wife, etc. would be established as law, creating classes of citizens with incrementally less rights. Otherwise, any scenario which two people can argue is a matter of spousal rights would be grounds for litigation. This becomes even more likely and more complicated with an increase in the number of spouses.
Extending the right of marriage to gay couples creates no such complications.
This is a bogus argument, and they know it.
If they want to have the debate over Triad marriages, by all means, have it. I guarantee that when the dust settles, you won't have more than a handful of people who would even want it. (Mormon pedophiles constituting a notable exception)
I'm sure if anyone checked,they'd find in the few years after the divorce laws were changed to allow divorce because of "Irreconcilable Differences" there was a stampede into the divorce courts, mostly by women wanting the yokes off their shoulders.
Except that he called it a 'threesome'.
To be fair, I don't think his wife was part of Bill's triad scenario.
Let's say they do legalize "Triads".... how much demand would there really be for such an institution? Aside from those Mormon pedophiles who want to collect a harem of pre-pubescent wives, how many people would be willing to share their spouse with another?
Sure, some men drool at the fantasy of having two wives, until they realize that they'd have twice the legal/financial obligation. And, how many women would willingly consent and sign a legal document to share their husbands with another woman? How many men would willingly share their wives with another man?
If you did legalize "Tiads", and strictly regulated it to weed out Mormon pedophiles and required legal consent up front from all parties, I'll bet that the demand would be infinitely small.
It's a silly, bogus argument. They have no logical reason to oppose Gay Marriage, and this is all their think tanks could come up with.
Wasn't it Mr. Bush who had his "Pet Goat" on his lap in front of children?
I have a serious question for our well-versed pundits.."If I marry a turtle and want out of the marriage, can I just make turtle soup and end it or would that be a crime? Saves on lawyer fees and community property hassles. I'll just threw her box into the trash and be done with everything. Maybe Bill-o is onto something.
Marrying a goat and a turtle, the ultimate triad, could turn out to be a full course divorce.
One of my red state friends embraces the gay marriage will lead to people marrying multiple partners or possibly even their favorite dog theory.
I feel sad about I can no longer have civil rights or political discussions with him anymore, though he is a true friend.
Read the book Under the Banner of Heaven, if you can squeeze it into your heavy research schedule.
Let's see now ... what can the little woman bring along with her? Five goats, 15 bushels of corn, 2 bolts of silk? Step right up!