To: markomalley
why in the world would anybody want four mother-in-laws?
2 posted on
07/15/2011 6:51:34 AM PDT by
camle
(keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
To: camle
...or is that mothers-in-law?
4 posted on
07/15/2011 6:58:09 AM PDT by
wita
To: camle
...why in the world would anybody want four mother-in-laws?LOL. Consecutively or concurrently? In either case, mine was a darling. I wish we still had her :)
5 posted on
07/15/2011 6:59:27 AM PDT by
mewzilla
(Forget a third party. We need a second one.)
To: camle
Once the State sanctions marriages other than between one man and one woman there is no logical reason not to permit other combinations. One man to one woman can be uniquely justified on the basis of what is normative for producing the next generation of good citizens. If marriage is sanctioned on the basis of rights, or emotion (how the various parties feel about each other) then it is open season for whatever combinations people can dream up.
8 posted on
07/15/2011 7:08:47 AM PDT by
Old North State
(Don't blame me, I voted for Pedro)
To: camle
“One” spouse is a ‘hand-full’. Anyone even thinking of more than that (let alone “4”) cannot be mentally balanced and needs to have their head examined!
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson