Why not?
Posted on 03/27/2013 1:11:54 PM PDT by Maelstorm
Justice Sonia Sotomayor was questioning former U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson, a pro-gay marriage Republican. She brought up a very interesting question during the exchange: If gay marriage is legal, what about polygamy?
Sotomayor asked, "If you say that marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist?" before referencing "polygamy and incest among adults," as reported by Matt Canham of the Salt Lake Tribune. The argument is an illustration of a broader issue about the culture of American society. To agree that gay marriage is indeed protected by the "equal protection" clause in the Constitution, wouldn't the same apply for all consenting adult relationships?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor's thought-provoking question was echoed by Bishop Harry Jackson, a minister at Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Md. He believes that "the real issue is the religious liberty issue and the issue of whether we can practice marriage as we believe it on an ongoing basis," and further stated that if same-sex marriage "is allowed to be mandated by fiat...then, right behind it, polygamy and many other forms of marriage will automatically sweep the land within just a matter of a few years." Advocates of legalizing gay marriage, as opposed to offering a compromise of "civil unions," which they argue is no different than "separate but equal" should consider this question.
Recently, President Obama's "Organizing for Action" tweeted a quote from the president, whose position on this has "evolved" in a big way from 2008, when he stated, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage." The tweet quoted the President as saying: "Every single American deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law," followed by the hashtag #MarriageEquality. If this is true, than America should do away with programs like affirmative action, which do not treat everyone "equally". Additionally, if this is true, than loving polygamous families should be allowed to get married.
how about INvoluntary marriage?
My reply was sarcasm about a “wise lanino”. I guess I should have put /s on it.
she should also know the federal government MANDATED marriage as one man and one woman as a condition of utah statehood.
I’m not. She’s a Latino and it would not be unusual for her to be liberal on most topics and staunch conservative on marriage. Meaning that she should not be counted on to be a reliable vote for the gays on this one.
Did she really go to school? She should know that the Mormons have fought multiple times on multiple wives.
__________________________________________________
Did you really go to school? You should know that the Mormons have not practiced polygamy for over 100 years, and it is an excommunicate-able offense.
cue the anti Mormon patrol in 3...2...1...
“she should also know the federal government MANDATED marriage as one man and one woman as a condition of utah statehood.”
As a Supreme Court Justice she should also know that their ruling will trump that mandate.
Thoughtful comment - BUT she's innocent of elite liberal thinking - IF it's all wide open - why would 'marriage' be restricted to 'adults' or for that matter 'humans'? Elite liberals want to destroy marriage - the 'gay issue' is only step one.
Different “status”. Sotomayor is playing games to give the impression she is being thoughtful.
Why not?
There are splinter groups that want polygamy and they were called poligs or something. The muslims want several wives to I expect that polygamy will come back through Obama.
Old sarge is closer to the truth.
The goal is to criminalize Christianity and to be able to use the power of the State to eradicate Christians and Christian beliefs.
I just got a beautiful Gibson Recording King archtop made in 1939. I demand that I be allowed to wed the guitar.
If ‘gay’ marriage is allowed, it re-opens the door for all other ‘marriages’... Man and dog - women and 500 illegal aliens - man and 20 wives... really, if the State can’t define marriage between a man and a woman - then they can’t define it... PERIOD.
Look for future ‘marriage contracts’ with expiration dates. Since they conveniently ignore Biblical principles then why insist marriage lasts a lifetime? A 20 year marriage contract or similar with a rider to renew or just let the terms expire. My prediction this will ‘evolve’ in the future.
Don't Worry!!!
They aren't legally Married, so it's not Polygamy!
So it's all perfectly legal!
Especially if we dip into them EBT Cards.
Great question from Sotomayor. She also was on the right side (unlike Roberts and Alito) on the drug sniffing dog on the porch case.
I think she may have a chance to move up to 5th on my list of favorite, current Supreme Court Justices after
1) Scalia
2) Thomas
3) Alito
4) Kennedy
and before
6) Roberts
Why shouldn’t I be able to marry my sister? I love her, well not in “that way,” but who is to say this is wrong? Besides, I have economic resources she needs. It’s all good. /s
I know a gay friend of my brother in law who cannot see his parents in Morocco because he could be arrested and imprisoned or worse. Why? Sharia! So how this SSM is a Sharia conspiracy is very dubious.
Precisely. That's why they have to overturn REYNOLDS to allow gay marriage. The SC will just shrug their shoulders and say "Well, that's why we overturned Dred Scott, because we've evolved as a country". BTW many Mormons went to prison for practicing their religion supposedly guaranteed under the First Amendment. Not a single homo has spent even one minute in jail over their "marriage". How many of us are going to prison for practicing our rights under the Second Amendment? Not a pleasant thought.
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.