Posted on 06/26/2015 9:57:38 AM PDT by rickyrikardo
Welcome to the exciting new world of the slippery slope. With the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling this Friday legalizing same sex marriage in all 50 states, social liberalism has achieved one of its central goals. A right seemingly unthinkable two decades ago has now been broadly applied to a whole new class of citizens. Following on the rejection of interracial marriage bans in the 20th Century, the Supreme Court decision clearly shows that marriage should be a broadly applicable right—one that forces the government to recognize, as Friday’s decision said, a private couple’s “love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family.” The question presents itself: Where does the next advance come? The answer is going to make nearly everyone uncomfortable: Now that we’ve defined that love and devotion and family isn’t driven by gender alone, why should it be limited to just two individuals? The most natural advance next for marriage lies in legalized polygamy—yet many of the same people who pressed for marriage equality for gay couples oppose it. This is not an abstract issue. In Chief Justice John Roberts’ dissenting opinion, he remarks, “It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage.” As is often the case with critics of polygamy, he neglects to mention why this is a fate to be feared. Polygamy today stands as a taboo just as strong as same-sex marriage was several decades ago—it’s effectively only discussed as outdated jokes about Utah and Mormons, who banned the practice over 120 years ago.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/gay-marriage-decision-polygamy-119469.html#ixzz3eBjpspHu
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
It’s time to ban Christianity...
So it beings.
So it ends...
“yet many of the same people who pressed for marriage equality for gay couples oppose it.”
Because they are flaming $@%%^%^#@# hypocrites, genius!
Do we really have to be the only sane people in this nation?
They're not going to do that - too obvious. What they will do is continue to make one little step at a time until it is simply implausible to be a practicing Christian without being tarred as a violator of someone else's "rights".
C.f.: Canada' "hate speech" laws
Based upon the majority Supreme Courts reasoning there is no logical objection to Polygamy.
When Traditionalists pointed out the logic of SSM leads directly to polygamy, they were laughed at and called wackos. Looks who is right now. Perhaps as this article mentions the whole SSM does not lead to polygamy was an outright lie on the pro-SSM side. They wanted to first make sure SSM is legal now onto polygamy. Viva La Revolucion!
... as a 'hate' (sic) crime. It is their ultimate goal.
Polygamy is overdue. Love should be a personal choice.
Love is a personal choice, polygamy should be banned.
Liberals call southerners “inbred rednecks”. Yet, liberals support sodomy and polygamy. Go figure.
That was fast.
Coming.
IOW legalize bigamy.
(aka immigration fraud)
Can't. It's discrimination. "Who are we to decide who one should "love?"
I'm surprised, now that homos are deemed "normal", that the bestiality groups are so quiet. Isn't it time for them to make their move?
If homos must be considered "normal", then shouldn't inter-species "love" be considered "normal" as well? What's the difference?
The slope has vanished, just a deep dark hole is all that is under us now... we fell in
The Bachelorettes. Coming to ABC this Fall.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.