Hot Blog-on-Blog ActionLots of politico-sexual analysis over on the Volokh Conspiracy, thanks to Sen. Rick Santorum. Short version: Santorum likened homosexuality to bigamy, polygamy, and incest. Eugene, giving Santorum the benefit of doubt, defends him by saying the comparison could be construed as a kind of constitutional slippery slope argument: even if homosexuality is not the same as incest, the Supreme Court might perceive it to be sufficiently similar, and therefore a precedent that constitutionalizes a right to (consensual) sodomy might be extended to protect a right to (consensual) incest as well. Jacob, after examining the full context of Santorum’s interview, concludes that Eugene has given him too much credit: Santorum really was condemning all these practices (homosexuality, polygamy, incest) as damaging to family values.
But the sex talk doesn’t stop there. Eugene also (in the same post) enunciates the libertarian position on all of these matters – to wit: we believe in freedom of sex, as long as it’s consensual – and he responds effectively to a reader’s denunciation of his position on incest, twice. In a later post, he wonders why lesbianism is subject to the same legal prohibitions as male homosexuality, even though none of the arguments against male-on-male action (weak as they are) apply to female-on-female action. And then he defends bestiality – not as a cool thing to do, but as something that should be legal so long as it doesn’t constitute excessive cruelty to animals. All this following last week’s speculation on attitudes toward vibrators.
Eugene’s right on all of this (except for giving Santorum too much credit), but I have to think his future political career, if he wanted one, is probably shot. I’d vote for him, though, and not just for his views on the sex-related stuff. (I’ll post my own comments about incest and bestiality later.)