Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Constitutional Attorney Sees Polygamy As Next Stage Of Sexual Revolution
Traditional Values Coalition ^ | October 5, 2004 | Louis P. Sheldon

Posted on 12/29/2004 1:46:06 AM PST by The Loan Arranger

Washington, DC –Jonathan Turley, a constitutional scholar at George Washington Law School has just penned what is a clear sign that our nation is not on a slippery slope toward sexual degradation and moral decline—rather our country is on a rocket-propelled missile into social chaos.

Turley argued in Monday’s issue of USA Today that polygamy is the next logical step in the goal of social activists to overturn any remaining barriers to the redefining of marriage. Turley says he detests the idea of polygamy but he has put forth the legal arguments for its legalization.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, in his dissent in the Lawrence v. Texas case that legalized sodomy said that this decision would be used in the future to legalize polygamy and other forms of sexual license. His predictions are coming true.

Oddly enough, Turley is arguing that the “right” to polygamy is a religious issue—one based in the history of the Mormon Church and its experience with polygamy until Utah’s leaders agreed to ban polygamy before becoming a state.

Polygamy and homosexual marriage, however, are not the only looming threats to traditional marriage. Homosexual activists and their libertine heterosexual allies are also pushing for the legalization of polyamory—or group sexual arrangements disguised as “marriage.”

(Excerpt) Read more at traditionalvalues.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: Texas; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: antoninscalia; gaymarriage; homosexual; jonathanturley; lawrencevtexas; marriage; polyamory; polygamy; turley; tvc

1 posted on 12/29/2004 1:46:07 AM PST by The Loan Arranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

Why the heck not? What goes on in the bedroom between consenting adults is no one else's business.


2 posted on 12/29/2004 1:48:39 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Than after that it will be NAMBLA's turn


3 posted on 12/29/2004 1:52:04 AM PST by chemical_boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chemical_boy

I'm afraid you're right. Why stop with adult humans? Every one knows children and animals have sexual lives. <sarcasm


4 posted on 12/29/2004 1:53:17 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

It's a Brave New World!!!

Soma for the masses!!!


5 posted on 12/29/2004 2:06:26 AM PST by kb2614 ( You have everything to fear, including fear itself. - The new DNC slogan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

"Why the heck not? What goes on in the bedroom between consenting adults is no one else's business."

No one stops people from having orgies. It is when people try to force the institutional acceptance of those orgies by the state and the culture which brings the chaos and the problem. Institutionalized hedonism has never worked and will never work. Sexual titillation, like drug addiction, can never be satisfied. Once, the next level is experienced to the point of boredom, everything will be racheted up a notch to the next level of decadence. If people want to covertly participate in decadence which brings great harm, let them, but let decent society function to keep us all surviving and in the process protect our innocent little children and women as safe from rape as possible. If our society removes the taboo on certain sexual practices which go further against the traditional family, we will soon see sex being forced on people without their consent.



6 posted on 12/29/2004 2:53:49 AM PST by jazzlite (esat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
The battle over traditional marriage is, in fact, a battle to preserve our civilization from tumbling into the ash heap of history—as many civilizations have gone before

I think this is very true, although I believe you can take many elements of the left's agenda and substitute it for "traditional marriage" and get the same result. So much of what the leftists want leads us to the same conclusion, and I believe if they win one major victory the game is as good as up.

7 posted on 12/29/2004 3:03:40 AM PST by SittinYonder (Tancredo and I wanna know what you believe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
Deut. 21:15 "If a man has two wives, one beloved and one hated, and they have children, one may not favor the beloved wife's children over the other wife's children." There's nothing untraditional about polygamy. (The question of why any sane man would inflict this on himself should be reserved for another thread.)

Clearly, as with all issues great and small, the government must be given absolute power to adjudicate.

8 posted on 12/29/2004 3:29:35 AM PST by Tristram Shandy ("Freedom" means freedom to do what we're told)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tristram Shandy

Well that was overturned by Christ, that is until Martin Luther. V's wife.


9 posted on 12/29/2004 3:52:52 AM PST by ventana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

Polygamy would be a disaster for any country that chooses to legalize it. Institutionalized abuse. A step back into the stone age.


10 posted on 12/29/2004 3:57:52 AM PST by tkathy (Ban all religious head garb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

If marriage can mean anything at all, then it means absolutely nothing at all.

That group of 100 over there....they're married. And there's coming and going and lawsuits and kids and welfare programs and child care credits and disease.


11 posted on 12/29/2004 4:22:24 AM PST by xzins (The Party Spirit -- why I don't take the other side seriously!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I suggest you read "Under the Banner of Heaven" before you accept that these relationships would be harmless.


12 posted on 12/29/2004 4:31:18 AM PST by Arkie2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

I don't accept the morality of these new relationships. All I am observing is that if the Left has its the way, the sky's the limit in organizing social relationships.


13 posted on 12/29/2004 4:33:11 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Why the heck not? What goes on in the bedroom between consenting adults is no one else's business.

Yes and another upcoming turn of events will be redefining 'adult'!

14 posted on 12/29/2004 4:40:30 AM PST by varon (Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
(from the article)

Historian J.D. Unwin, writing in his 1934 book, Sex and Culture, surveyed the destruction of 86 different cultures throughout history. He discovered something very shocking: Every society that rejected monogamy in marriage and pre-marital chastity, did not last longer than a generation afterward.

This is a startling statement. It's not only polyamory, Mormons and homosexuals who are being "discriminated against", but Muslims - who are allowed 4 wives at a time (and can divorce them at will). It is they who will next be clamoring for "equal rights" in alliance with the usual sodomites and assorted orgyists who see society in no other terms than a venue for getting sex, obtaining power and flouting libertine lifestyles.

15 posted on 12/29/2004 5:10:51 AM PST by Gritty ("blue staters’ theophobia is more pervasive than red staters’ homophobia"-Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
Of course, it hasn't had any impact on Muslim countries.

[/sarcasm]

16 posted on 12/29/2004 6:43:24 AM PST by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

The way I see it we are going the way of the old Roman Empire, they rotted from the inside till they were over run by a stronger outside force.


17 posted on 12/29/2004 6:48:30 AM PST by TMSuchman (American by birth,rebel by choice, MARINE BY GOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
I can't imagine what the fuss is about. Polygamy isn't coming; it's already here. Consider these facts:
  1. Under current family law, if a man lives with a woman for an extended period of time, a Family Court judge is free to decide that he owes her all the traditional obligations of marriage, most notably alimony and support for her children, even though they never married.
  2. That child support is not conditional on him being the provable or admitted bio-father of the child.
  3. Men have been adjudged by courts in several states to have forfeited their houses to their unmarried bed partners, on exactly the same logic (or lack thereof) that produced points 1 and 2 above.
  4. Despite these things, men, including men who've been savaged by such "palimony" judgments, routinely go looking for new lovers -- without "divorcing" their former mates.

The cases alluded to above exhibit all the legal consequences of marriage and marital dissolution, but without the formalities of divorce. Sure sounds like polygamy to me. Serial bigamy, anyway.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit Eternity Road:
http://www.eternityroad.info

18 posted on 12/29/2004 6:54:00 AM PST by fporretto (This tagline is programming you in ways that will not be apparent for years. Forget! Forget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: The Loan Arranger

Muslims believe in polygamy too. Wouldn't want to discriminate against the 'religion of peace'.


20 posted on 12/29/2004 11:18:05 AM PST by Mogollon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: The Loan Arranger

My wife’s sister asked me if I would go to the Home Depot with her to get some supplies for a project she was working on while her husband was at work. She and my wife look very much alike. They were standing next to the shopping cart talking while I was on another aisle looking for something. A guy came along and was hitting on them. My wife’s sister said, “Our husband is just around the corner.” The guy got a funny confused look on his face and walked away.


22 posted on 12/29/2004 1:05:36 PM PST by ORECON (There is no vast liberal conspiracy, they're only half-vast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tkathy
Polygamy would be a disaster for any country that chooses to legalize it.

The same can be said for same-sex marriage.

23 posted on 12/29/2004 1:07:38 PM PST by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
Polygamy and homosexual marriage, however, are not the only looming threats to traditional marriage.

That's darn tootin'!

I want to marry my Sears wet-and-dry vac.

Ain't she a doll?

24 posted on 12/29/2004 1:08:45 PM PST by Lazamataz ("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" -- harpseal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
I cannot fathom what a hassle a marriage with two (or more) women would be.

Just ONE wife is enough, thanks! :)

25 posted on 12/29/2004 1:12:53 PM PST by Constitution Day (Free presidio9!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

The liberal social reformers of today are the useful idiots of Islam who would dominate the world by demographics and Sharia law.


26 posted on 12/29/2004 1:14:53 PM PST by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Rofl


27 posted on 12/29/2004 1:15:38 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I'm waiting for a bi-sexual to demand the right to marry one of each.


28 posted on 12/29/2004 1:18:09 PM PST by csmusaret (Urban Sprawl is an oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TMSuchman

It was the Roman Empire that institutionalized monogamy exlusively. Romans/Greeks were monogamous with lots of mistresses. Kind of oxymoronic. Any way the Roman Empire so well that we decided to copy it. Ain't it wonderful how great it has worked. All the monogamous marriages working out so well.

The fact is that evil men want monogamy. They want one wife and a pool of available single women that they can prostitute and fornicate with with no responsibility. Monogamy is very anti woman/children. This is partly why woman and children are so degraded and humiliated in cultures that push monogamy to the extreme such as the west does.


29 posted on 03/19/2005 1:33:10 AM PST by nostod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson