Posted on 07/01/2015 12:12:21 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
And the women should be polyandrous. How would Tex like that?
And bestiality, and incest, and “intergenerational” child molesting.
That is one great graphic.
Thanks gracias yo how etc. etc.
I like that collage of photos and comment-but at the risk of being picky-George Zimmerman IS Caucasian/white-Latino/Hispanic is an ethnic group, not a race-most Latinos are Caucasian...
Stupid SCOTUS-they should have thought twice and voted once-after insisting Ginsberg and Kagan recuse...
I actually hope the Mormons in Utah sue for reparations for 100+ years of being denied their “right” to polygamy that was part of their religious belief-that should be fun to watch...
I call this the Warren Buffett Plan
Well, this escalated quickly. I had anticipated a little longer before the polygamists started their campaign, but expected it nonetheless. What will be really fascinating is, if all those who supported same-sex marriage on their facebook feeds support polyamorous marriage. If not, I certainly intend to have some fun with those who would put their arbitrary numbers as a limiter on love
At least polygamy is in the Bible.
Which is exactly what they’ll point out while they’re screaming “Hypocrites!” In our faces.
Which is when we should point out that polygamy was NECESSARY in ancient, AGRARIAN, PATRIARCHIES. Women in pre-industrial, pre-technological societies were primarily breeders; their main job was to produce children, preferably sons. Women had no property or inheritance rights. Children were extra farmhands; more children increased the amount of food produced. Which in turn led to greater accumulations of land and wealth by the Patriarch. The Patriarch was in turn expected to provide for all needs of all wives and all their children. He was even expected to take in the widows and children of his brothers. Upon his own death, property passed to his sons, not his multiple widows, who were dispersed to live in other households.
We don’t live in agrarian societies anymore. Polygamy today, polyandry and “poly amorous” relationships tomorrow, aren’t focused on creating a stable or cohesive social structure within a particular economic context. Nor are these modern “poly” pushers even concerned with providing basic necessities for themselves and their children. The central focus is on a demand for variety in sexual partners, with the expectation that the state programs can provide for any and all material needs. As well as the assumption that even more inconvenient children can be aborted and families abandoned without consequence to individuals or societies because the “rich” can just pick up the tab.
Yep! I predict it will happen before this year is over.
Based on denying polygamous marriages is not unconstitutional.
So how are they going to light up the Rainbow House now???
Will it be blinking neon lights every couple of minutes.
Called it!
>>After the Supreme Court’s decision is there any argument against polygamy being legal?<<
Word for word, Obergefell applies to marriage between any number of people of any sex or gender or blood relationship.
To REALLY mess with them, I am waiting for an incestuous couple to file. That is 2 people who love each other and want to marry, which matches word for word Obergefell.
Marriage no longer exists as a social or moral institution. So, let’s blow it up completely.
>>I want to marry my car, my wife says I love it more than her anyway! LOL<<
Have you seen the commercial with the car as a baby? Hilarious, ‘caus it’s true!
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.