Posted on 03/31/2013 5:09:42 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Also, “it’s just bad faith to forbid the brother and sister on these putative health grounds”
The words in the title and subtitle were spoken by one of the leading thinkers and advocates in favor of gay marriage, University of Chicago Professor Martha Nussbaum, in a speech she gave at Cornell Law School in 2009 (video and discussion below).
I was reminded of those words after Dr. Benjamin Carson created a stir when, during a television interview, he made the following comment (emphasis added).
Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is a well-established fundamental pillar of society, and no group — be they gays, be they NAMBLA [North American Man/Boy Love Association], be they people who believe in bestiality — no matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition. So it’s not something that’s against gays; it’s against anybody who wants to come along and change the fundamental definition of pillars of society. It has significant ramifications.
That last highlighted portion often is not quoted when Carson is attacked for allegedly “comparing” those other unlawful acts to consenting homosexual sexual relations. As Patterico points out, the actual words used by Carson were not a comparison of one to another, which Carson also denied in a follow-up interview.
Rather, as John Nolte at Breitbart.com further pointed out, No Media Outrage After Sotomayor ‘Compares’ Homosexuality to Incest, Dr. Carson raised the question of where society draws the boundry once one man/one women no longer is the standard. This also was raised by Justice Sotomayor during oral argument last week.....
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
If the only criterion for marriage is “love” then there is no logical reason to limit it to unrelated people nor to just 2 people.
No reason not to allow polyamory nor incest since procreation is not an issue.
Pretty much any sexual combination, once you’ve swept away the limitation of between a man and a woman, would have to,be permitted.
I’ve had my eye on that cute collie down the street.
The Enabling Acts passed by Congress which allowed the entrance of four states, UT, ID, AZ, and OK, into the Union, forbid plural marriage FOREVER.
Dust off old 132
Yeah, that’ll stop ‘em even though the constitution, thousands of years of tradition and English common law didn’t.
Homosexual Groups give an Untold Amount of Money to Political Groups (both Dem and Repub) Throw a Tantrum and Get exactly what they want!
Shoot, Anyone could exploit that system.
I predict massively fewer women are going to sign up for polygamous relationships than gay marriage.
I’ll bet you a steak dinner that you’re wrong. There’s lots more benefit in a polygamous relationship for a female than their is in lesbianism. Plus, there are many times more heterosexuals than homosexuals.
I’m just sayin’.
I will marry all my adult children. No inheritance taxes.
Polygamy is inherently conducive to power imbalances, sexual subjugation, and other abuses that do not inherently exist in the case of same-sex marriage. It only seems to work on a very small scale when all the wives get on well together and any inheritance is legally limited to one child or split evenly. If you think things are complicated now, imagine what would happen when those relationships go bad.
Redefining marriage between a man and woman is supporting bestiality, supporting marriage between an adult and 8 year old child. Polygamy and any other behavior man could possibly imagine
The arrogance, the ignorance, the selfishness of anyone believing they can redefine marriage is as others have said, is the depth of depravity.
Hey not so fast I saw her first.
Just getting America ready for those wonderful Muslim harems?
If marrage is redefined, then pologamy will no longer be prohibited. If polagamy is permitted, then Muslims and Mormons will be allowed to practice it. This will resultin a lack of available females, and will eventually destabalize (not that society today is stable) society.
Just plain stupid.
‘The Enabling Acts passed by Congress which allowed the entrance of four states, UT, ID, AZ, and OK, into the Union, forbid plural marriage FOREVER.
As Sen. Cruz was attempting to articulate with the Feinstein lady was that once you start legislating outside the boundaries of the constitution, anything is possible.
Enabling Acts??? They were written by old dead people. What did they know? We are so much superior to them that I do not need to be reminded of them. See my key to the senate club room, that’s proof that I am superior to all but a few chosen others.
The democrats are feeling their oats and aren’t going to let a little thing like established law get in their way.
He’s an idiot. Incest is bad on the gene pool so that one’s easy to keep banned. And polygamy really screws up the property divisions and inheritance plan, which is the only reason the government cares about marriage in the first place, so also still banned.
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.