Saturday, May 2, 2015

Anyone Up for a Three Way ... Marriage?

Justice Samuel Alito asked if polygamy would be around the corner if gay marriage was forced upon the States during oral arguments in a recent Supreme Court hearing.  Here is the exchange:

Alito: Well, what if there's no -- these are 4 people, 2 men and 2 women, it's not--it's not the sort of polygamous relationship, polygamous marriages that existed in other societies and still exist in some societies today. And let's say they're all consenting adults, highly educated. They're all lawyers. What would be the ground under--under the logic of the decision you would like us to hand down in this case? What would be the logic of denying them the same right?

Bonauto: Number one, I assume the States would rush in and say that when you're talking about multiple people joining into a relationship, that that is not the same thing that we've had in marriage, which is on the mutual support and consent of two people. Setting that aside, even assuming it is within the fundamental right –

Alito: But--well, I don't know what kind of a distinction that is because a marriage between two people of the same sex is not something that we have had before, recognizing that is a substantial break. Maybe it's a good one. So this is no -- why is that a greater break?

Bonauto: The question is one of--again, assuming it's within the fundamental right, the question then becomes one of justification. And I assume that the States would come in and they would say that there are concerns about consent and coercion. If there's a divorce from the second wife, does that mean the fourth wife has access to the child of the second wife? There are issues around who is it that makes the medical decisions, you know, in the time of crisis. I assume there'd be lots of family disruption issues, setting aside issues of coercion and consent and so on that just don't apply here, when we're talking about two consenting adults who want to make that mutual commitment for as long as they shall be. So that's my answer on that.

This lawyer is concerned about coercion and consent?  Aren’t the citizens of a state coerced into accepting gay marriage without their consent?  That’s what this whole court case is about, isn’t it?  And since when are the concerns of a state taken into consideration these days?

This lawyer cannot be serious.  Once gay marriage is forced down our throats, polygamy will be next.  Hell, a Green Party leader in the U.K. is considering legalizing polygamous marriages, and as we all know Great Britain is the standard bearer for the left. reported the following:

Green Party leader Natalie Bennett has said her party would consider allowing polygamous marriages and civil partnerships in the UK.


Speaking in a Q&A session with PinkNews readers, the Green leader responded to a question from Redfern Jon Barrett, who asked: “As someone living with his two boyfriends in a stable long-term relationship, I would like to know what your stance is on polyamory rights. Is there room for Green support on group civil partnerships or marriages?”

Bennett responded: “We have led the way on many issues related to the liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships, and we are open to further conversation and consultation.”

Notice this guy was asking about marriage with two other guys.  That slippery slope everyone warned about is covered in Vaseline.


No comments: