Who is this man to judge the polygamists? If two of the same sex can marry, my gosh can't more than two of the opposite sex marry? Polygamy is found everywhere in nature, but homosexuality is an abomination to nature! (Even bacteria doesn't engage in it!)
If two homos can marry, polygamy should be an easy one! It shouldn't even be questioned.
While we're at it, why not marry anyone or anything? What difference does it make now?
What a moron.
The first polygamy challenge is starting in Montana right now. The likely plaintiff was very clear why he and his two wives were doing it: the Supreme Court opinion.
I don’t think I ever met a homosexual that didn’t have the exact same right to marriage I have.
Multiple marriage involving members of the same sex is also a possibility. how could the courts deny this?
“By allowing high-status men to hoard wives...”
Why think that men will be able to hoard wives? If a man can have more than one wife, a woman can have more than one husband. If a man has two wives, each of the wives can have at least one other husband.
I wonder what the husbands would be to each other. Husbands-in-Law by virtue of having the same wife? “Brother Husbands” reflecting the term “Sister Wives” I’ve heard used in regard to the multiple wives of one husband?
If the first man in the chain has two wives, and each of the wives has another husband, and each of those husbands has another wife, is the first man in the chain related to those last wives by marriage?
My head hurts, not to mention my heart.
Sin makes people stupid.
Of course it isn’t. Pederasty is the next gay marriage.
Homosexual men have always had the same right to marry that heterosexual men have had.Marriage is for the orderly replacement of the race in such a way as to raise the new generations in the best conditions. That is all, even biblically, if you think about it.
“By allowing high-status men to hoard wives at the expense of lower-status men”
False premise. It’s not the 7th century anymore (outside of Afghanistan and a few other places). The weirdos wanting polygamy today aren’t doing it because the think wives are a measure of wealth or status. Nor is it necessarily going to be multiple wives. Who is to say that we won’t see three gay guys, or a woman and two guys, and so on?
This fool’s flailings are nothing more than an attempt to blunt the reality of how big a legal door SCOTUS’ ruling has likely opened.
Funny how the left are such hypocrites on this marriage thing
Just one question for John-boy: if polygamy and other deviations from traditional marriage is so outlandish, why are you bothering with writing this article; why waste your time?
We know the answer.
A civil marriage comes with a limited warranty to stay together "as long as we both shall love". Holy Matrimony is a covenant made before God to remain faithful "until death do us part".
Gibberish....
There are no square circles. Marriage is male and female. One each.
Justice Ahole Kennedy did not write about a limiting principle. He wrote about feelings. There is no limiting principle. The ahole has opened Pandora’s box and anything goes. It’s all right there in the 14th Amendment.
Having pried open the definition of marriage just wide enough for gays it is time to close it. It’s typical in just about any social structure. marriage won’t be special to gays if everyone else gets in.
I used a similar line on Facebook today about a friend's post about the trio applying for a wedding license out west.
The LGBTA activists are the biggest liars outside the Glow-bull Warming Mafia. They told the polygamists to keep quiet during the recent struggles. Now the polygamists are coming out in force.
If marriage had been redefined through a normal legislative process, then this douche-bag might have a point. But since the Supreme Court has once again short-circuited democracy, what this ass-wipe thinks is somewhat irrelevant. What is relevant is what bull-s**t can be sold to 5 Progressive Justices on the Supreme Court.