Posted on 01/13/2013 4:03:34 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
I keep hearing same-sex marriage (SSM) activists assuring us that no one else will legally redefine the essence of marriage, after they enjoy the privilege of doing so. It's a red herring to distract us from the real issue: redefining it for them alone.
But if we redefine marriage for one group, there's no logical reason to deny other nonconformist advocates their right to do so, especially if they successfully argue their version of marriage on utilitarian grounds -- it benefits or does no harm to society.
I don't know who invented the slippery slope fallacy, but he or she shouldn't be decorated with a medal. Sometimes the slope exists, it really is slippery, and people actually slide down it. In the 1950s, Lucy and Ricky were shown in separate beds. In the late 1960s and early 1970s the Brady Bunch parents shared the same extra-wide king-size bed, but were far apart. Today? No need to describe primetime or daytime TV. The sex drive is powerful, and society has publically slid down that slippery, muddy slope long ago.
Here are two more nonconformist groups clamoring for their share of the marriage mud pie.
First, polygamy.
Islam allows polygamy for men. They can marry up to four women if the men can afford them (Quran 4:3). Of course religious scholars can't deny the clear teaching of the Quran. Allah wills it. So they inform us of the social benefits of polygamy....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Arlandson is right.
Calling a goose a duck doesn’t make it a duck.
But you may soon be able to marry the goose and/or duck. (they have such sensitive eyes)
But you may soon be able to marry the goose and/or duck. (they have such sensitive eyes)
I have been saying this for years. If one group gets to "redefine" marriage, then you have no legal ground to stand on in stopping more "redefinitions" from happening. If there is nothing special about one man and one woman being the definition of a marriage; then, what is so special about the number 2?
Throw consanguinity and lowering the age of consent into the mix - these two are already on the list.
Bingo.
Yes, I'm afraid so.
And Bringem Young was wrong.
Normalizing pedophilia and incest and pretty soon its okay to have sex with your own little kids
and leftists/libertopians think messing around with the foundations of civilization won’t have severe consequences... why??
Normalizing pedophilia and incest and pretty soon its okay to have sex with your own little kids
and leftists/libertopians think messing around with the foundations of civilization won’t have severe consequences... why??
“Polygamy and Polyandry”
Seems to me that both of these are effectively practiced today. Since in half of the unions today, marriage is not involved and the same people often sleep around.
The gates have been flung wide, and soon virtually every sort of sexual expression will have its own advocacy group.
I expect that there may even be some out there agitating for open masturbation in public. While now it is considered an indication of a seriously disturbed mind, who knows what will be excused and even encouraged within a decade?
There just isn’t a more instant form of gratification available anywhere. Even downing drugs or alcohol has a certain time lag involved, and there is only so fast that things external to the body can be engaged in that quest.
There is no maximum limit on depravity.
I’ve read that pedophilia is legal in roughly 119 countries, mostly muslim.
ugh
kiddie porn is legal in a few places too, sick (like in Tokyo Japan)
Headlines like this show we are already near the bottom of the sewer. Polyandry and polygamy would be a step up from “same sex marriage”.
I didnt know it was legal there, thats depressing.
What I fail to understand is why some same-sex “marriage” advocates get all offended when polygamy is suggested as the next step. Why any of them would be offended or repulsed by it is the height of hypocrisy IMHO.
Polygyny(one man, two or more wives) certainly has more biblical precedent than the other one. And might actually result in another human being coming into creation(something homosexual relations can never cause).
Exactly. Not much difference between serial monogamy and polygamy. Actually, polygamy would be more humane vs. tossing the first wife out.
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.