Michael Gerson has a profound view of liberals:
>These messages of responsibility are often reinforced by tightknit religious communities, but they are not owned by them. Wilcox notes that American liberal elites often “talk left and walk right, living disciplined lives and expecting their children to do the same, even when they hold liberal social views.” Divorce rates among college-educated Americans, he points out, have fallen since the 1980s, as it became more evident that casual divorce did not serve the long-term interests of their children.
Well, it’s not him, but some guy he quotes.
Perhaps he ought to be reminded that some liberals–probably most–were against “abstinence-only” sex-education because it was moronically ineffective at its stated goal of reducing teen pregnancy, STDs and so forth, not, as he seems to suggest (via Wilcox) because “liberal elites” embrace consequence-free licentiousness.
In a related matter, “slippery slope” is a logical fallacy, not a kind of cogent argument. The National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez writes:
>Just a coincidence that this happened in Massachusetts [where gay marriage is legal–NS editors]?
>”Sherborn teen charged with bestiality”
Someone please inform the National Review.
To her credit, however, she links to this from Alabama.
And then she apologizes–but not for the silly argument.