This isn’t a marriage; it’s a freak show initiated by three mentally-ill women. Maybe they can run in the Marathon next year to give Red England media something else to glorify...
And also there is no way a close-relationship marriage could not win in a court challenge.
Ultimately, when a son seeks to marry his dad to inherit his estate with no estate taxes, and argues "fairness" and "consenting adults" should trump ancient, bigoted morality about incest and procreation, the court will face a serious decision: Can community standards and morality frame marriage, or not? Legal precedence around same-sex marriage have answered that as a resounding "No!". Deciding against polygamous or incestuous marriage would roll that decision criteria back, which would imperil same-sex marriage. Agreeing to the precedence opens marriage up to any two or more consenting adults, and fundamentally changes inheritance and estate laws.
When gaystapo claim marriage should be “any two people”, a change in our definition, we should be challenging it with “why two?”. Marriage must mean something, not anything....then it has no meaning. So why not polygamy? Other cultures allow it, while specifically not allowing gay marriage.
We should demand that there be an ethics basis for the definition of marriage and for our opponents to write down what that definition is and why.
Liberals are pot smoking jackasses beyond belief. Next a female will marry her horse, and Tinkerbell will marry dumbo. WTF. America is turning into a circus.
is throuple pronounced throw-uple?
Note I'm excluding myself from America.
The very minute that the courts decided to change the meaning of “MARRIAGE”, there were people that were warning them, that they have just opened “PANDORA’S BOX”. These people were warning every body, that “MARRIAGE” will mean any thing to any one. There will be people that will promote “MULTIPLE MARRIAGE”, “MARRIAGE BETWEEN HUMANS & ANIMALS”, “MARRIAGE BETWEEN AN ADULT & A CHILD”, etc, etc, etc. At the time, the “GAY LIBERATION MOVEMENT” denied that none of these things will happen. They, the “GAY LIBERATION MOVEMENT” just wanted to show every body that “LOVE” can and should be recognized. Well, now the predictions of these people have come to pass. And no one seems to care. This is what happens when “GOVERNMENT” decides to interfere with something that really doesn’t belong to “GOVERNMENT”.
The silver lining in all this (if there is one) - is that the homosexual lobby, and people like this will eventually make such a joke and mockery of marriage, is that eventually society will again see the union of a man and a woman, regardless of government consent, as the true natural order of things.
Unfortunately, society will have to fall a lot further before that happens, and none of us will live long enough to see such a revival - but the cycle will turn, that is for sure.
If only we could refuse to allow the spotlight to shine upon them, if only we could shrug and turn our heads away. If we go back to our normal everyday business as if they did not exist, these people would be deflated and they will slink back into obscurity. Nobody will pay them any attention at all. They will have to find a way to earn a living, pay their bills, and it won't be a pleasant reality for them.
lesbians cause burka alerts.
“the trio eventually plan to have three children - one for each of them.”
This statement is an admission that their nature leads to a desire to procreate, while their choices make it impossible to pro-create.
I would have told my daughter to get out of my house and go p*** up a rope!
Several years ago a lesbian friend of mine asked me why I was opposed to gay marriage. I asked her if it was okay for the guy down the street to marry his German Shepard that he was very fond of, or if my cousin could marry his John Deere tractor, or if it would be okay for someone to marry their daughter or son. She told me that those were all ridiculous examples. I told her that we all have lines we won’t cross I just chose mine at a different place than she did.
Oh, just give it time.
They hope to show the world that polyfidelity is an acceptable choice of love.
Who didn't see this coming? If marriage can be redefined once, why not twice?
Judging by the fact that there are red arrows of people who disapprove of this lifestyle, this proves to me that there are already people (liberals) who already support this. All they have to do to promote this is use the same methods they have used to promote homosexual marriage. Use tv shows, use the media, and tell they youth they are bigots if they don't support it.
Marriage apparently means whatever anyone wants it to mean. Words no longer have any meaning at all to liberals. And they are sadly convincing the younger generation that that is the truth, as if there could be any such thing as truth in their worldview.
Judgment cannot be far away.