Posted on 04/29/2015 3:51:34 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito decided to make same-sex marriages advocates face the logical extension of their position, asking bluntly why four people of opposite sexes could not marry, given the argument that two people of the same sex should be able to wed. Earlier in the day, he also challenged the basic premise of her same-sex marriage argument, prompting an apology.
Alito fired the question of four partners in a marriage at Mary L. Bonauto, the attorney arguing for same-sex marriage advocates. Alito, a staunch Roman Catholic, threw down the gauntlet in the following exchange:
Alito: Suppose we rule in your favor in this case and then after that, a group consisting of two men and two women apply for a marriage license. Would there be any ground for denying them a license?
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
He stole my question from a thread yesterday:
How many people should be allowed to marry each other and why?
I may sue.
Since the LGBTQ-crowd now has so many different forms of perversion, we ought to just lump them all into GDS... Gender Derangement Syndrome.
There it is. Alito has made it clear that ruling in favor of gay marriage is effectively a ruling in favor of poly.
I guess we’ll see what comes next.
Shalom!
How about harems? Gay harems? Lesbian harems? Brothers marrying sisters? How about two men and a sheep? The possibilities are endless! /sarcasm
Or marrying a goat or with a child?
The NFL started that years ago.
LOL!!!
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Why doesn’t Justice Alito explain that, since the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay marriage, the states are free to make laws which discriminate against constitutionally unprotected gay marriage?
Justice Alito should also explain to Ms Bonauto that since the states have never delegated to the Supreme Court, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to define marriage, Ms Bonauto needs to do the following if she really wants gay marriage to be a constitutionally enumerated right.
She needs to work with state and federal lawmakers to propose a gay marriage amendment to the Constitution to the states. And if the states should choose to ratify the amendment then gay marriage will be a constitutionally enumerated right and Ms Bonauto will be a hero.
Note that seemingly deceptive justices like Justice Alito probably wouldn’t be on the bench if state lawmakers hadn’t ratified the ill-conceived 17th Amendment, foolishly giving up the voices of state lawmakers in Congress by doing so.
If “Adam & Steve” and “Alice & Eve” are ok, why not polygamy?
If I want to marry my car and my favorite coffee mug, shouldn’t I be able to?
(yes, I’m joking)
I will marry my toaster. We’ve known each other a long time.
Must it be a consenting sheep? Ewe!
I shudder to think of your wedding night.
Just think of the savings on taxes! People could marry their pets and claim them as dependents. An old man could marry his son so there wouldn’t be any inheritance tax. The mind boggles!
Shocking!
LOL
Bonauto must be tired or have some illness. That response is stupendously, stoopet and priceless.
Alito: Suppose we rule in your favor in this case and then after that, a group consisting of two men and two women apply for a marriage license. Would there be any ground for denying them a license?
Bonauto: I believe so, Your Honor.
Alito: What would be the reason?
Bonauto: There’d be two. One is whether the State would even say that there is such a thing as a marriage, but then beyond that, there are definitely going to be concerns about coercion and consent and disrupting family relationships when you start talking about multiple persons. But I want to also just go back to the wait and see question for a moment, if I may. Because —
Isn’t someone usually being coerced in a marriage anyway?
And if you don’t know the answer.......it’s usually you.
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.