Posted on 12/28/2013 7:07:06 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
To quote Robert Bolt, channelling St. Thomas More, the world must construe according to its wits. Courts must construe according to the law. I personally don’t see how they allow same-sex marriage between consenting adults and don’t eventually allow polygamous marriages, or for that matter consanguinous marriages, or (oy) any combination thereof, on the same basis. Yeah, there’s still the eugenics thing about incestuous marriages. Do you really want to be the poor slob of an attorney making that argument in an American courtroom in 2014? No. No, you do not.
True.
But that will not save the rest of us from paying for the party.
WWLD? What would Laz do?
No problem as “gay” marriage is not on my acceptance list. Tired of being expected to endorse evil.
Polygamy, while outside biblical norms as understood in New Testament terms, is far more palatable than homosexuality, which is totally beyond the realm of moral rectumtude.
Societies have survived and even thrived under polygamy. Not one has survived the normalization of homosexuality.
You assume that all or any of the women shall bear children.
Scalia predicted as such
Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and others all had multiple wives.
Utah was required to outlaw polygamy as a condition of its admission to the Union. Does that mean we can expel states that allow it from the Union?
I should have specified “in these days” is insane. Back then, it was women were more like servants, not having a “honey do” list every morning.
While they’re not like servants, most Asian women I’ve known or dated aren’t like that as much. They’re not subservient like the image says, but they don’t have that chip on their shoulder that you see so much in the West.
If marriage is everything, then it’s nothing...and no doubt some liberal judges will realize that marriage itself is a form of discrimination, where people form a “couple” & forsake all others-—excluding other people not part of said “couple”. A free-thinking judge then will decide that government may NOT favor “couplings” over other arrangements that people by RIGHT must decide which ones are best for themselves.
So then polygamy will of course by one such arrangement...but it won’t stop there. Then it will be groups of males & females marrying individuals or other groups of males and/or females.
To facilitate this downward spiral against law & order, it then will be decided that government may NOT zone for single-family housing with an evolving definition of single families or “family”. Then, you will get the Manson family as your next door neighbor....& sooner than you might imagine.
Once society accepted serial monogamy, it lost the moral high ground to stop everything else.
Well, we already have an abundance of “men” fathering multiple children with multiple women. Sort of a de-facto polygamy, usually supported by welfare.
Ok, I’m not quite there yet (so please don’t flame me for this) but sometimes I find myself almost thinking that if a guy wants to try to live with sixteen females all at once, he deserves what happens to him ... sort of a built-in system of punishment requiring little or no external intervention?
just thinking is all...
just thinking...
Americans don’t have to accept either. But if they accept ‘marriage’ of homosexuals, than they’d have to accept polygamy to be logically consistent. Granted, logical consistency is not a value of the left. This has been a long time coming, starting with normalizing the hook-up culture and all that comes with it.
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.