AMERICAN CULTURE NYT BOOK REVIEW COVER CARTOON ENTITLED SUMMER READING MY SCRIPT BUBBLES

Where is Barry Blitt when you need him?

Here, ' together ', two nyt things, March 23 NYT Magazine story re the 'science' of bi sexuals, and the June Book Review Magazine cartoon cover (the rainbow umbrella above table of contents shows perhaps that the heterosexuality of the cartoon cover is tongue in cheek (Blitt could transform this into something the editors and cartoonists only imply) :

My cartoon is now based on (implied) bisexual, but cruder, themes, same graphics:

1. "He's hot. I'm ugly, and bi. She thinks I love her. Not." 

2. "I'm farting. His butt is cute. Had a sex change. He doesn't know."

3. "I don't want her, much, not ugly, black."

4. "Philosophy, hot."

5. "Constipated, and lifting helps."

6. "I want you; I'm rough. She's bi."

Terms search: beautiful ugly philosophers

One of the next shoes to drop, in 
America, will doubtless be triad marriage rights.

You're already now, suddenly, on a slippery slope: why then not quad rad, quin tad, bestial, a closely held corporation etc, marital rights?

After all, the Supreme Court has held, in various related decisions, that corporations are persons in some senses, religious and otherwise. 

Hobby Lobby only the latest, and not taking into consideration issues of gender, orientation, love, or other potentially conflicting legally binding bonds, apart from religion, among them. 

Why not expand so called marital rights along with those of corporations? It's America, after all.

American ' cultural ' jurisprudence is thus on a slippery slope, similar to that of its popular culture, with other areas being pulled into the issue maelstrom, swirling, below.

Thought experiment, re slippery slope. Think tanks do this all the time:

How about, for example voluntary cannibalism? The ostensible meal decides to make a binding contract to be eaten, either for money, or, say, they also start a religion, with this as a tennent? Say they say they are lambs of God? 

Under the establishment clause, where does it go, state by state?

The environmentalist lobby might favor it, waste not want not, sustainability, green initiative, frugality, zpg, etc.