Salon Libtards Upset Conservative Polygamist Demand Rights

Who are we to judge when it comes to love?  That’s what gay activist and their liberal accomplices said to conservatives when we opposed same-sex marriage.  Libtards pooh-poohed our admonitions that the Supreme Court’s ruling would open the door for polygamy, bestiality and all sorts of perversions that the unstable and mentally insane can dream up.  Well, we warned you.

The writers at Salon.com are now the arbiters of what constituents love and marriage.  To them, it’s alright if gay people can marry, but not okay for a conservative to marry two consenting women.  Here is their snarky riposte:

Well, conservatives, here it is, just as you predicted. Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria... And on cue, here comes Nathan Collier — a man who describes himself on Facebook as “an American, conservative, Constitutionalist, capitalist, (formerly) Christian, heterosexual middle aged white male of Southern heritage” — and his lovely two brides Victoria and Christine, asking for official recognition of their union. Coming soon: Cat ladies applying for marriage licenses!

And this:

If you want to argue that polygamy and marriage equality are the same thing, well, they’re not. If you want respect for how consenting adults arrange their households, though, you’ve got it. That does not however mean that because one group that has fought for friggin’ decades for basic recognition and respect finally has achieved something, that every fringe group — and yeah, sister wife families, you are fringe — gets a piece of the action too.

Actually, polygamy has been around for thousands of years from Abraham and Charlemagne right up to modern day in some cultures.  Same-sex marriage is a recent invention.  Polygamists have more of a claim on marriage than Dick and Harry.

 Source:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/spencer-raley/2015/07/02/salon-writer-cant-handle-polygamist-who-wants-same-marriage-rights#sthash.lHaJ7x7l.dpuf

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.  Breitbart.com 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.

Source:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cnsnewscom-staff/justice-alito-why-not-let-4-lawyers-marry-one-another

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05/01/green-party-open-to-permitting-three-way-marriages/

Muslims Leech off of Western Welfare State

A common problem that western countries are dealing with is polygamy amongst Muslims. A big motivator for having multiple wives and hordes of children is to leech off of the welfare state.

France has 20,000 African Muslim families that are polygamist.  Even though it is outlawed, this foreign custom continues and the French taxpayers subsidize this anti-western practice.

The welfare state allows Muslims to breed like rabbits. Without a means to support their wives and children, they couldn't continue their third world custom and foist their culture upon the host country.  To tolerate polygamy is to support the Islamic Caliphate.