Posted on 07/21/2020 12:57:07 PM PDT by Kaslin
Somerville, Massachusetts? Isn’t that where Nambla is headquartered? What next adults marrying children?
Towns can legalize things like polygamy? How about allowing ten year-olds to drive?
ML/NJ
Being married to more than one person would be it’s own punishment. Love my wife, but 2? Hard pass.
Rush warned about that several years ago.
You are right, of course, but the real danger arose from LBJ’s feral government welfare policy that intentionally attacked the nuclear family such that three fourths of black Americans are raised as fatherless feral amoral pavement primates.
some of us did on here too, plus the next one after this is reduce the age of consent to 13. I guarantee it the child molesting lot are very powerful as we can see by Epstein, and others who seem to die once they are caught or they go missing. Some of the powerful people involved Oprah, Ellen, Anderson Cooper, Tom Hanks, Clintons, some of their aides like Podesta.
Eventually, conceivably, someone could marry a relative (brother, sister, child, parent, even of the same sex) to keep their money in the family. It’s not personal - it’s strictly business.
Sometimes I hate it when I'm right all the time.
I said this when gay marriage first came about. Opens the doo up for anything that you think you want. I want to marry my dog and she gets equal rights to everything.
This is a Great Idea, we should all demand to MARRY Our Congressional Rep in Absentia, regardless of theirs or our own marital status so we can collect their Retirement Package and Benefits also.
I can’t imagine having more than one wife.
Unless they’re all really hot.
It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage. If “[t]here is dignity in the bond between two men or two women who seek to marry and in their autonomy to make such profound choices,” ante, at 13, why would there be any less dignity in the bond between three people who, in exercising their autonomy, seek to make the profound choice to marry? If a same-sex couple has the constitutional right to marry because their children would otherwise “suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser,” ante, at 15, why wouldn’t the same reasoning apply to a family of three or more persons raising children? If not having the opportunity to marry “serves to disrespect and subordinate” gay and lesbian couples, why wouldn’t the same “imposition of this disability,” ante, at 22, serve to disrespect and subordinate people who find fulfillment in polyamorous relationships?I do not mean to equate marriage between same-sex couples with plural marriages in all respects. There may well be relevant differences that compel different legal analysis. But if there are, petitioners have not pointed to any. When asked about a plural marital union at oral argument, petitioners asserted that a State “doesn’t have such an institution.” But that is exactly the point: the States at issue here do not have an institution of same-sex marriage, either.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S.Ct. 2584, 2621-22 (2015) (Roberts, C.J., dissenting).
I guess he could say "I told ya so." But based on his reasoning in the recent abortion case, this probably means he is of the opinion that stare decisis demands a holding now that laws against polygamy are unconstitutional.
I waiting for cats and dogs to start living together.
I’ve always said that is their real agenda.
I just married my horse!!
Low-class town adjoins Cambridge ... home of Harvard and MIT ... but now gets its own 15 minutes of fame
Phyllis Scafley warned of this more than 40 years ago.
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.