Same-sex marriage and the slippery slope argument
Many opponents of same-sex marriage argue that, if it’s allowed, then polygamy (among other things) is not far behind. These are often the same folks who aver that “marriage has always meant one man and one woman” (including Mitt Romney, who should know better; Brigham Young had as many as 19 wives at one point).
However, apparently having polygamy doesn’t lead to same-sex marriage.
The UN wants to allow spousal benefits for same sex couples (if they’re from countries that already have such benefits, such as the Netherlands), but the Organization of the Islamic Conference is against the idea.
The United Nations has already recognized polygamy, a common practice in the Islamic world, as a legitimate form of marriage and permits employees to divide their benefits among their wives. But the decision to expand that right to same-sex partners has fueled intense opposition. Iran’s representative, Alireza Tootoonchian, speaking on behalf of the 56-member Organization of the Islamic Conference, said there was “no justifiable basis” for awarding benefits to same-sex couples. He demanded that the UN clarify its position. The OIC is “seriously concerned about extending the scope of the family definition for the purposes of entitlements,” he said.
