Note the date: 2008!
Posted on 10/08/2022 8:19:54 PM PDT by TigerClaws
An opinion from New York City’s eviction court has come down on the side of polyamorous unions.
In the case of West 49th St., LLC v. O’Neill, New York Civil Court Judge Karen May Bacdayan reportedly concluded that polyamorous relationships are entitled to the same sort of legal protection given to two-person relationships.
West 49th St., LLC v. O’Neill involved three individuals: Scott Anderson and Markyus O’Neill, who lived together in a New York City apartment, and Anderson’s husband Robert Romano, who resided elsewhere.
Anderson held the lease, and following his death, the building’s owner argued that O’Neill had no right to renew the lease because he was a “non-traditional family member.”
The attorney for the property owner said that O’Neill’s affidavit, in which he claims himself as a non-traditional family member, is a “fairytale.”
According to LGBTQ Nation, the case returns to court after further investigation of the three individuals’ relationship.
In her decision, Judge Bacdayan highlighted the importance of a previous case and asserted that the existence of a triad – no matter how they got along – should not automatically dismiss O’Neill’s claim to non-eviction protections.
SEE ALSO
Sexologist Tamica Wilder opens up about living with boyfriend, husband and kids “Before gay marriage was legalized in any state, Braschi v. Stahl Assocs. Co., 74 NY2d 201 (1989) was decided. The New York State Court of Appeals became the first American appellate court to recognize that a non-traditional, two-person, same-sex, committed family-like relationship is entitled to legal recognition, and that the nontraditional family member is entitled to receive noneviction protections. The Braschi court interpreted the Rent Control Law in effect at a time when there was no legal recognition of same-sex marriage, and broadly construed the law to effectuate its remedial purposes.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
this was inevitable ... how soon before goats, sheeps and horses are allowed to be included ...
someone need only identify as a goat, sheep or horse and it wouldn’t even be beastiality!
*puke*
Given the decision on homosexual marriage, this was pretty much guaranteed. How could they stop it? What standard could be used to block it? It’s “anything goes” now.
Note the date: 2008!
“Furbies” ?
Soon we will see the argument that if a child is mature enough to decide to become trans, then any child can have all kinds of “relationships” with adults.
Yep - that cartoon was prophetic.
Indeed.
Fourteen years....
...I shudder to think what perversions and atrocities will receive “normalization” by 2036.
This will ruin employers that provide insurance for spouses. As long as it is limited to one spouse it will be OK, but of course the polygamists will not like it. Once polygamy is legal companies will no longer provide insurance for spouses. It will become a serious problem.
Absolutely.
And there are many examples of a man being “smitten” by a woman — and perhaps making bad choices because of it.
And there are many examples of women being “smitten” by a man — perhaps even an abusive man — with whom she maintains a relationship which is clearly manipulative.
THEREFORE if an adult were to groom and manipulate a young child into a sexual relationship ... it’s all pretty much the same thing, isn’t it? [shrug] It’s just the way humans are. And if society tries to intervene and say “that’s not right”, well ... that sort of hatred can’t be tolerated, right?
If I was a property owner or manager in that kind of city, I would only rent to individuals. Two is bad enough. Dealing with three different people? NO! There will be a lot of renters gaming that system, to make sure they never have to pay any rent from their own pocket.
Ummm ... it's "polyamory", it's just filthy disease-ridden queers doing what they do ...
All thats left is beastiality and necrophilia
See my post
And pedophilia.
I rented this apartment and got married to 4 beautiful brides and 5 husbands. You cannot stop them from staying here too...
And where will it go from here?
That’s their goal in pimping that perversion.
Another looney, dickweed “judge”.
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.