Here is the prime offender, he will have sex with anyone/thing/being....
Posted on 04/17/2013 5:28:12 AM PDT by ReformationFan
Yes. The worst are full of passionate intensity.
LOL!
Maybe you’re onto something. I’ve known some really lovely trees.
Very good, Grace. Lots of people seem to be “into” xenopolyamory.
Here is the prime offender, he will have sex with anyone/thing/being....
I was gonna wait till Illinois passed gay marriage to say this but since we’re on topic.
If they are gonna let men marry men then I DEMAND the right to marry more than one woman.
And I DEMAND the right to marry my first cousin.
Both polygamy and cousin marriage are way more common in world history and more common today than domestic faggotry. The USA is only western nation where cousin marriage is not legal (in some states like Illinois).
While I’m at it I DEMAND the right to marry a woman without her consent if I work out a deal with her dad for some cattle or something. That is also more common. Does anyone have French pop singer Alizée’s dad’s number?
So what’s the hold up? Why are MY rights being denied?
Because polygamists and cousin bangers don’t have a lobby like the gays do.
Totally unfair. If it’s about “equal protection” then they have no choice, they MUST allow me to marry as many of my first cousins as I want. I should not have to move to Afghanistan to be be able to marry my cousins without their consent!
I’m waiting!!! Governor Quinn!!! Justice Roberts!!!
What about marrying oneself?
“If you think a f**k is funny, f**k yourself and save some money.”
wait until you can marry your own underaged kids
“In other words Polygamy will also lead to increases in the Homosexual community.”
Which will give the homosexualists more reason to support it. Also, the socialists should love polygamy because it will probably result in more folks on the dole and increase the number of Democratic voters.
Remember to the liberal mindset, a lie is never a lie if it assists in helping the “common good” a/k/a an all-powerful socialist state that will make everything “fair”.
‘Totally unfair. If it’s about “equal protection” then they have no choice, they MUST allow me to marry as many of my first cousins as I want. I should not have to move to Afghanistan to be be able to marry my cousins without their consent!’
That sounds suspiciously similar to how a liberal argues in reality.
That’s the point.
Did I need to put a /sarc tag?
Marry Handrea? That skank?
Maybe if Jim Webb runs for President he’ll make that part of his platform (if you remember hearing about his disgusting novel).
At least you know where “she’s” been!
Conservatives should stifle their knee-jerk reactions against polygamy and instead consider what characteristics of marriage have been universal even among societies that accept polygamy. Doing so will reveal that every thriving society has defined marriage to mean a relationship involving exactly one man and at least one woman. A relationship between two men and zero women would have both the wrong number of men and the wrong number of women. A relationship involving two women and zero men would have the wrong number of men, but a perhaps plausible number of women (depending upon circumstances, if two women enter into marriage with the same man and are subsequently widowed, they might continue to have some relationship with each other, but the common identity of the late husband would be a significant aspect of that relationship).
Viewed from such a perspective, even if one dislikes polygamy, a marriage involving one man and two women would be closer to a monogamous marriage than one involving two men (and zero women) or two women (and zero men).
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.