Skip to comments.
Alito Fires at Same-Sex Marriage Advocate: Four in a Marriage Okay?
Breitbart ^
| 2015-04-29
| William Bigelow
Posted on 04/29/2015 3:51:34 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 last
To: Clintonfatigued; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; ...
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
41
posted on
04/29/2015 8:58:36 PM PDT
by
BuckeyeTexan
(There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
To: exit82
Not quite, a legislature could define marriage as something else and then it would not open all those doors. What opens all those doors is a court deciding that marriage is a right.
Once something becomes a right, then it belongs to everyone. A legislature redefining marriage would keep it still limited, but less limited than in the past.
42
posted on
04/30/2015 12:25:20 AM PDT
by
JLS
To: usconservative
Hey, what about Waffle Irons?! Somehow all this explicit talk is making me hungry.
43
posted on
04/30/2015 4:11:44 AM PDT
by
Flick Lives
("I can't believe it's not Fascism!")
To: Flick Lives
Somehow all this explicit talk is making me hungry. Did you mean eggsplicit?
44
posted on
04/30/2015 6:04:21 AM PDT
by
usconservative
(When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Considering that polygamy is already legal in many parts of the world (mostly Islamic countries), polygamists would be in a FAR stronger position to argue that “two person marriage” is discriminatory, especially if their polygamous marriage was already recognized in their country of origin.
45
posted on
04/30/2015 6:09:04 AM PDT
by
PapaBear3625
(You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
To: usconservative
I think Alito threw down a much bigger guantlet than that. It won't be just polygamous marriages, there will be no stopping a re-definition of what a "minor" is in order to enable adult/child sexual relationships, for example. It's already legal for a 16-year-old to marry, with parental consent, in most states. Some states allow even younger, with a judge's approval.
The hidden purpose of the gay marriage movement may indeed be to facilitate legal adult/minor sex. I could see some drug-addict mom giving permission for her child to marry a gay man, in exchange for some cash.
46
posted on
04/30/2015 6:26:51 AM PDT
by
PapaBear3625
(You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
To: henkster
Hmmm... that brings to mind the recent Battlestar Galactica series, where they called the Cylons “toasters”.
There were a few very nice looking “toasters”...
47
posted on
04/30/2015 6:29:40 AM PDT
by
MrB
(The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
To: usconservative
48
posted on
04/30/2015 7:11:52 AM PDT
by
Flick Lives
("I can't believe it's not Fascism!")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson