Posted on 03/06/2015 9:40:46 AM PST by fuzzylogic
Three gay men from Thailand have tied the knot in what is thought to be the world's first three-way same-sex marriage. Happy newlyweds Joke, 29, Bell, 21 and Art, 26, took the plunge on Valentine's Day after exchanging their vows in a fairy-tale ceremony at their home in Uthai Thani Province, Thailand.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Is this an Art Bell Joke?
Man, you beat me. I thought the same thing!
Reads like a joke. But if the SC upholds gay marriage, it won’t be long before someone pushes for legalizing three way marriages and everything else.
The nuptials will be a real circle jerk. Life imitates art?
Well, it’s no more phony, no more ludicrous, than a two-way homo marriage.
This will happen here too. Right after all 50 states have gay “marriage “.
Coming soon to an Obamanation near you!
Today Thailand, but we too will one day have our own ‘Three Stooges’ get their day in court.
Two violent attacks today as well ...
“U.S. Envoy to Seoul, Lippert, Injured in Attack by [knife attack]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3264269/posts?page=16#16
[I link to a cloak-and-dagger post on Lippert]
Federal Judge Terrence Berg Shot at Detroit Home
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3264752/posts
[Shot in leg while taking out the trash.]
Some men would want to marry their stuffed animals.
My uncle, mother, my dog a banana and I intend to get married.
• “[M]arriage, as a union between one man and one woman, is the fundamental unit of society.” • “[M]arriage has always been between members of the opposite sex. The obvious reason for this immutable characteristic is nature. Men and women complement each other biologically and socially.” • “[O]ne legitimate interest behind the laws (among others) is recognizing and encouraging the ties between children and their biological parents.” • “Government is concerned with public effects, not private wishes. The new definition of marriage centers on the private concerns of adults, while the traditional definition focuses on the benefits to society from the special relationship that exists between a man and a woman, i.e., the effects for care of children, the control of passions, the division of wealth in society, and so on.” • “[I]f love was the sine qua non of marriage, then polygamy also would be constitutionally protected . . . .” • “[W]hat ultimately is at issue is the entire edifice of family law . . . an edifice that has existed in some form since before the United States was even a country. . . . It is no small thing to wipe away this edifice with a wave of the judicial wand.”
______________
I take special note here of the point
“[I]f love was the sine qua non of marriage, then polygamy also would be constitutionally protected . . . .”
And if there is polygamy among members of the opposite sex, there would be polygamy in same-sex relationships, there is recognized marriage there.
There is already a case where a father wants to marry his daughter. No disposition yet, but there you are!
LOL.
Sum Ting Wong.
5.56mm
Are you speaking of this ?
Revolting
Yes.
It’s not legally recognized. But apparently it’s religiously recognized by the Buddhists, disgutsing.
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.