Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/31/2015 10:31:45 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: 2ndDivisionVet

There are no more moral boundaries in America. Anything goes.


2 posted on 05/31/2015 10:34:14 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

kids out of wedlock, divorce and gay marriage. how can a country go wrong /s


3 posted on 05/31/2015 10:35:41 AM PDT by dp0622
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I, for one, welcome my . . . er . . . uh . . multiple divorce suits (all at once), my new STD (which one of them gave THAT to me?) and multiple alimony and child support dollars flowing out every month.

/s

4 posted on 05/31/2015 10:36:44 AM PDT by BipolarBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I can imagine where the logic is going. You have "Susie has two mommies" and the social engineers will decide that a child needs both a mommy and a daddy, but having two mommies or two daddies is now okay.

The next leap logically, to meet both dictates is "Susie has two mommies and one daddy" or "Susie has two daddies and one mommie".

It's Alice and Wonderland logic. Start with an insane premise and you come to insane conclusions.

6 posted on 05/31/2015 10:37:43 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Nonsense.

If every one of these liberal pathologies, like same-sex marriage and abortion, were removed from the dictatorial Federal Courts, and the American people were allowed their constitutional right to vote on the issues, they would all be defeated!

These polls are designed as a propaganda effort to change the culture.


7 posted on 05/31/2015 10:38:22 AM PDT by Oak Grove (H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Sure, let’s have each ruthless billionaire hedge fund trader marry a dozen disagreeable feminists! Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.


9 posted on 05/31/2015 10:39:43 AM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The story isn't the ascendancy of gay marriage or now polygamy. The story is that heterosexuals turned their backs on marriage. We accepted divorce. This is what we got.
10 posted on 05/31/2015 10:41:05 AM PDT by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Good article, if a depressing one. And I think Douthat nails it on polygamy. As traditional institutions are weakened and redefined, it makes it easier for each successive “expansion” to succeed.

If the law acknowledges marriage between two men or two women (as I think will happen in next month’s SCOTUS ruling), then it isn’t that much of a stretch to argue that a man and two women could also some day be recognized. History has a lot more basis for that kind of arrangement than gay marriage, to boot.


11 posted on 05/31/2015 10:42:38 AM PDT by DemforBush (Ex-Democrat, and NotforJeb. Just so we're clear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I give it no more than five years and polygamy will be legal in at least some states based on the ruling of an unelected federal judge


12 posted on 05/31/2015 10:42:56 AM PDT by The Great RJ (“Socialists are happy until they run out of other people's money.” Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

If the Supreme Court (i.e., Justice Anthony “I am the Constitution” Kennedy) rules in favor of SSM, the Traditional Mormons will be racing to the courthouse to claim that polygamy is likewise Constitutionally protected. If consent is all that matters regarding a couple getting married, why does it have to be a couple? Why not a group?


16 posted on 05/31/2015 11:05:15 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

This all had to come with the support of same-sex “marriage” - because it isn’t actually support of same-sex “marriage”, it’s that these same people don’t really care about the concept of marriage at all - hence what the purpose of marriage is has become irrelevant in their minds.


17 posted on 05/31/2015 11:09:49 AM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Far far far more precedent in human society for polygamy then SS “marriage”. Once you break the mold of “one man one woman”, all bets are off....


23 posted on 05/31/2015 11:23:51 AM PDT by Kozak (Walker / Cruz 2016 or Cruz/ Walker 2016 Either one is good...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The women’s rights grrrls won’t let anyone have polygamy unless they are given polyandry in return.

Or, probably, multiple husbands, wives, bisexuals, transsexuals, and whatever, all living together.


24 posted on 05/31/2015 11:29:23 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
I want to marry my recliner😊
28 posted on 05/31/2015 11:51:56 AM PDT by Rockpile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I want to know how they ask questions too.

For example, regarding unwed motherhood.

If I were asked if I approve, I would say no. If I were asked a slightly different question, such as, do I think single mothers can raise children without a father, I might say yes,, even though I disapprove of the idea in the first place.

I question if 2/3 of Americans really approve of single motherhood, based on just how questions are asked. Was it a push poll of some kind, in which they tried to get positive responses to liberal scenarios???


36 posted on 05/31/2015 1:06:24 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The philosophy that says you can screw anything that moves, and even a few things that don’t, will always be easier to sell than Christianity.


37 posted on 05/31/2015 1:09:34 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I just don’t get the argument against polygamy.

It’s just A-Okay for people to sleep around with no commitment or care to any children that come along. The single mom can always go on welfare.

But let a man commit to providing for the women he has children with and that’s somehow wrong?

And it’s all (wink-wink, nod-nod) when Hugh Hefner or Charlie Sheen has multiple women openly living with him in the style of Caligula but it’s wrong when some of these reality TV people do the same thing.

It’s all a hypocrisy of this society that will sooner or later have its day in court and then poly will be just as legal as everything else.

Or we can pass a Constitutional Defense of Marriage Amendment.

There will be no in-between.


54 posted on 06/01/2015 2:52:50 PM PDT by MeganC (You can ignore reality, but reality won't ignore you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson