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

Skip to comments.

Why Gay Marriage Advocates Must Support Triad Marriages
Modern Conservative ^ | May 12, 2009 | Gina L. Diorio

Posted on 05/12/2009 5:18:05 PM PDT by history_48

by Gina L. Diorio

This really should come as no surprise. Just as gay marriage advocates argue that any two people who love each other should be allowed to marry, now a group in Maui, Hawaii is saying, hey, why stop at two?

The World Polyamory Association, headed by the husband-wife team of Janet Kira Lessin and Sasha Lessin, is pushing for legal recognition of “triad” marriages. Of course, Janet and Sasha lead by example, having, uh, joined, with another “husband” – Shivaya, (see Threesome Marriages).

Some might say this is crazy and argue it will never be accepted, but I’d like to present a tidbit of truth here: if you support gay marriage, it is impossible for you rationally to oppose triad marriages.

Yes, I’ll say it again: If you support gay marriage, it is impossible for you rationally to oppose triad marriages.

Now, I know some people reading this just got very angry with me. They’re saying, “Wait, I believe in same-sex marriage by I by no means would support triad marriages. How dare you say that, logically, I have to?”

I’m so glad you asked.

Two primary arguments given in favor of gay marriage are the arguments of emotion and equal protection.

Well, based on these arguments, it’s impossible logically to deny three people (or four, or five, etc…) the same “right” to marry. After all, if three people love each other, shouldn’t they have the right to marry? And wouldn’t denying three people the right to marry be a violation of their right to equal protection?

“Wait a minute,” you might be saying. “Your claim still doesn’t hold water. Sure, I believe in same-sex marriage, but I also believe strongly in monogamy.”

Ok, that’s great. But on what basis?

No really, think about it, what’s your basis for believing in monogamy.

Is it because it lowers the risk of STDs? Well, wouldn’t three people in an “exclusively committed” three-way relationship also have a lower risk than those with multiple or random hook-ups?

Or maybe you believe monogamy is best for raising children. Ah, but wait a minute, research has actually shown that the healthiest environment for children is in a two-parent home being raised by a mother and a father (note the gender difference there).

So, I’ll say again. Rationally thinking, if you support same-sex marriage you have to support triad marriages.

Now, you might respond to me and say, “No, I don’t support triad marriages – because they’re just wrong!”

Well, sorry, that doesn’t hold water. Because what’s your basis for right and wrong? If you believe in same-sex marriage, then you already have adopted a subjective standard of right and wrong based not on history, not on religious tradition, and not on scientific research. but rather on a “if they want to they should be able to” philosophy (or, even better, on a “this is my truth” philosophy).

So, then, this same philosophy would have to apply to triad marriages as well.

Some of you will think I’m crazy for positing this necessary connection. If so, I’m glad. I hope it will inspire you to examine the arguments and try for yourself to arrive at a logical and rational basis for opposing triad marriages while supporting same-sex marriages.


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: deviants; fagagenda; gaystapo; homobama; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; moralabsolutes; notmarriage; perverts; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: mnehring

Prison marriages. Can they be moved to separate prisons?


21 posted on 05/12/2009 5:46:13 PM PDT by donna (Required experience for the next Republican President: Military Service!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: history_48

Here’s an idea:

Have all the homosexual people in the entire world, on a specific day, at a specific time; raise their right hand and say, “I do”. Then pronounce them all married to each other. All of them.

Problem solved.

Then ask them to please shut up and leave the rest of us alone.


22 posted on 05/12/2009 5:47:21 PM PDT by ChicagahAl (Don't blame me. I voted for Sarah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

That’s it.... I’m doing it.

I’ll be looking for a young, good looking, intelligent, hardbody gal with incredable wealth. Must be heterosexual.

All applications must include photos and full financial statement.

I like long walks on the beach, all music, any water sport, hunting, fishing, shooting, travel, food, Harley’s, boats of ever kind, playing in the dirt with my tractor, big dogs, dog sports, sports cars, photography.... too many interests to list. Living with me is like living with a 5 year old, so I’m told.

Turn offs: anything lib

Got looks, got guts, got lot’s and lot’s of money..... call me.


23 posted on 05/12/2009 5:55:32 PM PDT by Gator113 (Weak-coward-racist-white hating-lying-traitor= Surrender Monkey in Chief-B. Hussein Obama...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
24 posted on 05/12/2009 5:55:48 PM PDT by Cyber Ninja (His legacy is a stain OnTheDress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

It’s stunning to see how fast things have been decaying....


25 posted on 05/12/2009 5:56:32 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

Don’t ya think we are wasting our time with the whole ‘logic’ thing? If we limit ourselves to that whole logic/right/wrong thing, I am not sure we can compete in their arena of ideas.

You may think they have to follow your line of thinking, but I bet they would argue that you are cheapening their newly legislated ‘right’.


26 posted on 05/12/2009 5:57:45 PM PDT by LearnsFromMistakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearnsFromMistakes

Correct, on the other hand when a person moves in next door to them wanting to marry a tree or a frog or have 37 wives, and they say it’s ridiculous...

it’s important people ask them why, point out their hypocrisy, etc. etc. etc.


27 posted on 05/12/2009 6:02:27 PM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing---Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin

girl, me too! Hubby wouln’t be able to handle it though, he says one of me is enough:-)


28 posted on 05/12/2009 6:02:37 PM PDT by joesjane (The strength of the pack is the wolf - Rudyard Kipling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: history_48

I agree. Once the traditional definition changes there is no way for it not to keep changing.


29 posted on 05/12/2009 6:06:09 PM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

Hey, moslems can marry 8 year olds, and marrying animals is not illegal, IIRC, in Wash St. Why not just lie down in the street and have at it? Force marriage with fish? Sodom did.


30 posted on 05/12/2009 6:15:09 PM PDT by combat_boots (When the government controls the captial, all that is left is tyranny. Tagline by Redwarning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

I love sheep


31 posted on 05/12/2009 6:17:38 PM PDT by VRW Conspirator (Who is Hugh Series?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

Can two adult siblings of the same genders (two sisters or two brothers) get married under homosexual marriage? And if not, why not?


32 posted on 05/12/2009 6:18:21 PM PDT by rom (Obama '12 slogan: Let's keep on hopin'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

I thought communes provided all that.


33 posted on 05/12/2009 6:19:24 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

I gotta warn you, this will result in more lawyers.


34 posted on 05/12/2009 6:23:46 PM PDT by 668 - Neighbor of the Beast (It's all resistance...and it's all good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

Do they have fourads? We’re looking for people to share the mortgage.


35 posted on 05/12/2009 6:24:19 PM PDT by nufsed (Release the birth certificate, school and passport records.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48; 185JHP; 230FMJ; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; ...
Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


36 posted on 05/12/2009 6:25:20 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: history_48

Why is it impossible? These folks twist themselves into logical pretzels to twist the normal meaning of words and nature. It should be no problem for them to make another twist.


37 posted on 05/12/2009 6:29:47 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Hi there waggleby! Fresh from your victory on the Troll thread I see. Of course this article is absolutely correct, since polygamy and even polyandry have existed over the ages, but until the last few years homosexual ‘marriage’ has never existed.


38 posted on 05/12/2009 6:34:10 PM PDT by Lucius Cornelius Sulla ("men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." -- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Lucius Cornelius Sulla

Yep and they would love to bring polygamy and whatever else they can think of back.


39 posted on 05/12/2009 6:39:49 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: history_48
If two homosexual brothers "love" each other enough (arguments about damaged offspring need not apply, of course) what logic can keep them from claiming the "right" to marry? And if they can marry when poly-marriage is approved what about other incestuous relationships? Mother and daughters, father and sons etc? What about harems and the like? Can a government that has reduced marriage to a self-defined love-pact truly ever deny any desired sexual contract on legal grounds?

Just because you don't believe in the slippery slope doesn't mean you won't fall on your ass!

40 posted on 05/12/2009 6:45:35 PM PDT by cartoonistx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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