Wanna bet, oh liberal cretin?
English PM “ We have peace in our time “ following a meeting with Adolf Hitler.
Why not polygamy? The ‘Supremes’ have now decreed that words have no integrity, the meaning can be anything you want it to be for any given word. Maybe in the future there will be a ‘court’ with fundamentalist Mormons and they will ‘decree’ that the word ‘marriage’ includes polygamy, too. Anything goes in the USA.
The only reason its not next is because pedophilia is next.
“slippery slope arguments are logical fallacies”
No, they aren’t. This is a common misconception. The objection to ‘slippery slope’ arguments does not come from them being fallacies. This person doesn’t know what a logical fallacy is.
I’d like to hear this writer’s explanation of why two brothers couldn’t marry each other under the new rules.
Yep. Sure. Right.
Are the gays EVER going to realize what TOOLS they are for the Left in the utter destruction of America? I mean, the blacks and other minorities haven’t figured it out in FIVE DECADES now, so how long of a run will the gays have?
Grrrrr!
If you allow one you allow all the flood gates are open see amnesty .
The progressives will not stop at anything.
Took this clown 500 words to say absolutely nothing.
There is now no language in the Constitution which blocks polygamy.
State laws (ex. Utah) on the subject of marriage ae now null and void.
Tradition (ex. no homosexual marriage) is gone - it's no longer a factor.
Religion (ex. no homosexual marriage) is gone - it's no longer a factor.
Question: Why is the world WOULDN'T polygamy be next? What blocks it?
Of course this isn't the end of it. Gays are seeking validation of their lifestyle, and they're not going to get that from just a marriage certificate. They want us to pretend it's a normal and healthy activity, and they want us to celebrate it.
Pretty soon Sandusky will be a "freedom fighter" hero for the left... and no child will be safe in this country.
The author is one dumb son of a gun. Sure he’s got some ten dollar words in there, but he is completely illogical.
Yes, it does!!
This idiot overlooks an important point. Historically (and even in other cultures around the world today), polygamy has had far more legal and cultural acceptance than "gay marriage."
Anyone who deigns to suggest that polygamy is not going to follow the same road to legal acceptance here in the U.S. is either delusional or is lying. The Supreme Court didn't change the legal definition of marriage last week. It eliminated any basis for any definition whatsoever.
No, Keith Brekhus, you are either missing the point or trying to hide the Truth. You cannot make such a sweeping ‘assurance’ because all your future is belong to the all powerful, every changing federal demigod. They will determine what is allowed, not the states, so you cannot assure anyone of anything because you do not know the future pronouncements of the dead-soul government.
The point this author doesn’t understand is that the principle behind the marriage definition no longer exists. There is no longer any basis for saying the definition is fixed and cannot be changed again. Words now mean whatever those in power want them to mean.
Yes it does, and a whole lot more in coming folks.
But all sorts of mischief are possible when you base Equal Protection on one's state of mind.
The (valid) civil rights equality struggles of the 60s were at least based on somewhat verifiable criteria: Race -- although nowadays even that question appears to be a state of mind.
This guy needs to argue with Jonathan Turley, not Martha Mccallum.
In no time at all. Just to set a precedent.