[[No Conservatives, Legalizing Gay Marriage Doesn’t Mean Polygamy Is Next]]
Yep -because liberals have pet sins they approve of and those they condemn- They approve of the ABOMINATION of homosexuality- and think everyone should be FORCED to approve of the ABOMINATION because they do, but by golly the sin of polygamy (which by the way was not deemed an abomination to my knowledge) is much worse than the ABOMINATION of homosexuality according to liberals!
You see, there are no objective truths with liberals- they subjectively pick and choose which ABOMINATIONS they like and don’t like
What’s next is to force gay marriage on churches. It won’t be enough to marry, but to marry in any church they want. Freedom of religion is the next battlefield. They already hate and despise God and His followers. Destruction is next.
If a bisexual woman falls in love with both a man and a woman, she shouldn’t have to choose. The author is a puritanical bigot clinging to old-fashioned and outdated norms.
Now this ahole knows better than the chief justice of the SCOTUS?
This guy is a moron. “Polyamorous” relationships are actually in vogue in some circles, and they are informal expressions of polygamy and polyandry. The Supreme Court has given us no basis for saying that those forms of marriage could or should be prohibited.
Ha ha ha.
Our argument isn’t based just on logic but on the One SUPREME ruler and Judge. And He says One Man and One Woman.
Man is flawed and man will get it wrong. God will not be mocked.
>>Sadly the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the conservative commentators who echo his argument seem to lack understanding that slippery slope arguments are logical fallacies. There is no relationship between same-sex marriage and polygamy. In fact, historically, polygamy has been almost exclusively practiced in conservative, male-dominated patriarchal cultures that are the antithesis of the progressive and liberating redefinition of marriage being promoted by LGBTQ Americans and their straight allies.<<
This idiot claims something is illogical and attempts to prove it by asserting something even MORE illogical. How in the hell does WHO practices what determine whether the legal arguments for one support the other?
Also, she admits this is a redefinition.
This is either the poorest argument one could make against polygamy, or the author is engaging in some tongue and cheek writing. (Not that cheek!!!)
True, next is pedophilia marriage. I just read that a 14 girl is going to ask her mom to let her marry her girlfriend(who is not 14). If the mom has any sense, she will say no f—king way.
The vast majority of homosexuals being “married” have no intention of ever being in a monogamous same sex relationship for the rest of their lives... they will bounce around spreading their deadly disease and corroding all of human society. And as they do their lustfull passions will increase to include every vile act that can be imagined and will demand that whatever they wish to indulge themselves in also be normalized and celebrated...
Well why wouldn’t it? The word “marriage” no longer has an objective meaning at least in the legal sense and the Court found itself not bound by language, so why couldn’t this, or anything else, be “next”?
And he must have missed all of the articles detailing where this is now the next battle, as well as articles, including in mainstream publications such as the Los Angeles Times, where “throuples” are going to be making efforts to be legally recognized as marriages.
First will be the attacks on the Christian churches by requiring them to participate in homosexual marriage while at the same time there will be attempts to neutralize age of consent laws as some states have age of consent to marry as low as 14
The argument will be if they are mature enough to marry at 14 they are old enough to consent to sex outside of marriage & if they are mature enough to consent to sex out side of marriage they are mature enough to be the leading actor/actress in a porn movie.
We are on the express lane to legalizing polygamy and soon to follow polyamory and child marriage. All it will take is some action by unelected judges.
Next up is likely incestuous marriage because there will be no objections based on things like underage consent. That is the stickler on pedophilia marriage. The age of consent may be raised as a blocker. But the perverts can beat that one by various end runs (e.g., children "emancipated" from their parents, parental consent, etc.).
The only one likely to fail is bestiality. Animals and other non-human entities (trees, cars, etc.) have not been shown to be able to engage the consent issue. Without a two-party agreement that is demonstrably consensual, marriage per se is not valid.