Marriage Redefined Again? (Sect Leader: Can’t Prosecute Polygamy When Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Legal)

NCR ^ | February 9, 2009 | STEVE WEATHERBE

[NYer]

so the case will “force the court to declare whether its judgments are based on law or that portion of public opinion they care about.”

Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[fifthvirginia]

Did I read that correctly,,, 20 wives?

Is this guy a glutton for punishment or what???

[Repeal 16-17]

This will happen in any State which legalizes gay marriage. Such a State will logically also have to allow all alternate types of “marriage” among consenting adults.

[annalex]

if same-sex “marriage” is legal, then so is any conjugal relationship between consenting adults.

Logical.

[musicman]

[Natural Law]

Society has come to accept what I call serial polygamy, that is the practice of having multiple spouses spread, one at a time, over ones life. Should we be shocked at the other perversions of marriage?

[annalex]

True. In fact, an argument can be made that serial polygamy is worse: the children in a reconstituted marriage would be better off with their natural parents and half-siblings under the same roof.

[MahatmaGandu]

*ping*

[yazoo]

“Suffredine told reporters that if same-sex “marriage” is legal, then so is any conjugal relationship between consenting adults.”

BINGO

[MahatmaGandu]

Society has come to accept what I call serial polygamy, that is the practice of having multiple spouses spread, one at a time, over ones life. Should we be shocked at the other perversions of marriage?

Except that polygamy is a traditional form of marriage. Pick up your Old Testament and see for yourself.

And that is why the liberals foam at the mouth to attack the heterosexual polygamists when they'd riot in the streets if a queer polygamist "family" were to be prosecuted. And that's the next thing: if straights can be accused of bigamy then so can all of the queers who do it.

[OneWingedShark]

>True. In fact, an argument can be made that serial polygamy is worse: the children in a reconstituted
>marriage would be better off with their natural parents and half-siblings under the same roof.

Hm, that’s a VERY good point.

[NYer]

This will happen in any State which legalizes gay marriage.

Not anytime soon in NYS. It would entail amending the state constitution.

[Natural Law]

"Except that polygamy is a traditional form of marriage."

While it was practiced in the primitive Hebrew culture, it is decidedly NOT traditional. By definition a tradition is something passed from one generation to the next. A three thousand year lapse in the practice would certainly disqualify it.

[MahatmaGandu]

By definition a tradition is something passed from one generation to the next.

Then by your definition in 20-40 years then gay marriage will assume the mantle of 'tradition'.

[NYer]

Should we be shocked at the other perversions of marriage?

Shortly after the MA courts declared gay marriage legal in that state, another group began lobbying to have bestiality laws lessened or dropped.

There are those who say this is necessary in a progressive society. But all of this has happened before and one need only look back on those ancient civilizations to see how rapidly they collapsed.

[MIchaelTArchangel]

Hey, at least the polygamists believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. They just repeat if over and over and over again.

[Repeal 16-17]

Not anytime soon in NYS. It would entail amending the state constitution.

Another way would be if Governor Paterson is able to replace anyone in a certain group of Court of Appeals Justices. I hope those four stay healthy and don't get into any scandals.

[annalex]

in 20-40 years then gay marriage will assume the mantle of 'tradition'.

Technically, yes, it will be able to claim some traditionality. Of course, just because something is traditional doesn't make it automatically good. The point remains that both gay marriage and polygamy are not traditional at this point: the former is a novelty and the latter is an extinct tradition.

[Natural Law]

"Then by your definition..."

Its not MY definition. If we are going to have honest discussions and debate we can't each decide to define the words used.