We Warned You About the Slippery Slope

Rate this post

Remember David Epstein, that Columbia University political science professor who was arrested for having incest with his adult daughter?
When news of his arrest first broke, liberal commentors said that, though incestuous, there’s nothing wrong (or unlawful) with sex between consenting adults. Now his lawyer is making the same argument, using homosexual sex and gay marriage as justification.
By that logic, polygamy and polyandry also are okay. For that matter, why limit it only to adults? — which is precisely what the pedophilial gay North American Man/Boy Love Association argues. Then again, why limit it only to homo sapiens?
If you think I’m joking, think again. In an article for The Weekly Standard in 2001, ‘Pedophilia Chic’ Reconsidered: The Taboo Against Sex With Children Continues to Erode,” Mary Eberstadt wrote:

“This social consensus against the sexual exploitation of children and adolescents…is apparently eroding, and this regardless of the fact that the vast majority of citizens do overwhelmingly abominate the thing. For elsewhere in the public square, the defense of adult-child sex–more accurately, man-boy sex–is now out in the open. Moreover, it is on parade in a number of places–therapeutic, literary, and academic circles; mainstream publishing houses and journals and magazines and bookstores–where the mere appearance of such ideas would until recently have been not only unthinkable, but in many cases, subject to prosecution.”


Lawyer defends Columbia professor charged with incest
‘It’s ok for homosexuals to do what they want at home, how is this different?’
By Daily Mail Reporter – Dec 16, 2010
The lawyer representing a professor charged with incest with his 24-year-old daughter has questioned why the alleged affair has been made public.
David Epstein was charged last week with one count of incest for what was allegedly a consensual three-year sexual relationship with his daughter. The political science professor at Columbia University, 46, allegedly slept with her between 2006 and 2009. Epstein, who specialises in American politics and voting rights, is also said to have exchanged twisted text messages with the woman during their relationship.
Matthew Galluzzo, defending Epstein, has said that even though his daughter had emerged as a victim in the case, she could “best be described as an accomplice”. He told ABCNews.com:

“Academically, we are obviously all morally opposed to incest and rightfully so. At the same time, there is an argument to be made in the Swiss case to let go what goes on privately in bedrooms. It’s ok for homosexuals to do whatever they want in their own home. How is this so different? We have to figure out why some behaviour is tolerated and some is not.”

In an interview with the Huffington Post, he added: “What goes on between consenting adults in private should not be legislated. That is not the proper domain of our law. If we assume for a moment that both parties [involved in incest] are consenting, then why are we prosecuting this?”
Epstein, who has taught at Harvard and Stanford, is currently on administrative leave from Columbia. He was married to another lecturer at the Ivy League institution, Sharyn O’Halloran, but the pair recently divorced.
In an earlier statement Mr Galluzzo called the charges against the professor “unwarranted and unfair.” “Professor Epstein is well-respected by his peers and students and he asks that his friends in the Columbia community support him and give him the benefit of the doubt during this trying time,” he added.
Switzerland legislators have proposed decriminalising consensual sexual relationships between first-degree relatives, including siblings and parents and their adult children. Consensual incest is also legal in China, France, Israel, the Ivory Coast, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain and Turkey, according to a 2007 report from the Max Planck Institute in Germany.

Please follow and like us:

0 responses to “We Warned You About the Slippery Slope


  2. This is wrong on so many levels, I’m speechless! We had a case in Washington State a few years ago where a man died due to fatal ruptures from a bestiality incident with a horse. The state felt a crime had been committed, but with no law against bestiality on the books, the only charge they could come up with was “animal cruelty”!
    Come quickly, Lord Jesus!

  3. Next they will say it is ok to have sex with your dog because it is in the privacy of your own home.
    What an abomination!

  4. Pushing the limits of COMMON SENSE in order to further a political agenda. This is just madness…

  5. What we need are some tall jibbets with very sturdy rope, in the town squares, especially near the Universities.

  6. This is idiocy: there’s no victim, there’s no crime, nobody got hurt and none of us need pretend to be offended. Get a life, guys, and leave this good man to get on with his. Why are we sheeple so bloody stupid that we allow our outrage to be intentionally deflected from all the naked Emperor’s little misdemeanors….His interfering in Iraq…His fiddling with boys in Guantemano… His rape of the Gulf which jacked off such a Climate-Changing Gusher?

  7. I’ve been making this argument for years, usually to the horrified looks of the person I am arguing with. What’s the difference between a pedophile and a homosexual? The knee-jerk response is “gay men are consenting adults”. No kidding? I didn’t ask what the difference was in the act itself, but in the minds of each person involved. After all, if a gay man cannot control his urges because he “was born that way”, isn’t this also true for a man that has sexual urges towards children? Only real difference between the two is that society has been conditioned to accept one, and not the other… yet. Posit that theory to your liberal friends sometime and watch the mayhem ensue!

    • You’re being inconsequential.
      You say “if a gay man cannot control his urges because he was ‘born that way'”, but that applies equally to heterosexuals.
      So if I replace “pedophile” with “heterosexual” in your purported “argument”, it still stands, from your perspective. Now riddle me that!
      > I didn’t ask what the difference was in the act itself, but in the minds of each person involved.
      That’s a straw-man argument. What’s in someone’s mind is all to himself and no-one can or should judge or try to “eliminate” that.
      What matters is how someone acts – and there you have the difference “in the act itself” that you so conveniently try to push aside for your contrived “argument”.

  8. The difference being that God sanctions heterosexual relationships and like it or not, this is normal, natural and healthy behavior. Nothing contrived about the argument – homosexuals claim they are born that way and hence, have no control over their desires. What is the difference with a pedophile? You are correct in stating that it is “the act” itself that defines this, so thank you for making my argument for me.

    • > The difference being that God sanctions heterosexual relationships
      And where does He condemn homosexuality? I don’t recall reading this in the Ten Commandments. The places in the Bible used to justify anti-homosexual tendencies are nowhere near anything coming directly from God or His Son Jesus Christ.
      You do know that not everything every person in the Bible says is straight from God’s lawbook, don’t you?
      > homosexuals claim they are born that way
      And heterosexuals don’t claim that? Did they make that choice? When?
      > What is the difference with a pedophile?
      Again that is not a proper argument. You know how to read and write, Hitler knew how to read and write. Does that make “What is the difference with Hitler?” a proper argument? No.
      > this is normal, natural and healthy behavior
      Inconsequential. You people claim that homosexuality is “not natural”, and if someone points you to cases in the animal kingdom where homosexuality occurs, you retort “we are not animals, are we?”. But you cannot have it both ways. Either you refer to “natural” as the governing principle or not.
      > What is the difference with a pedophile? You are correct in stating that it is “the act” itself that defines this
      Yes, one act is consensual between adults, the other (pedophiles) isn’t. So there’s your difference. Glad to make your argument for you. 😉

  9. Regarding the horse incident, here are links to the story.
    Enumclaw-area animal-sex case investigated
    Videotapes show bestiality, Enumclaw police say

  10. The Truth about why our Government is acting the way they are , the Technocratic bureaucrats have taken over the Government because they all fear Overpopulation and want to design a Government that can control it and do it from the relm of the UN agenda 21 platform , check out all these links about it at this link .


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.