IJReview: It’s a question that many people find insulting or uncomfortable right off the bat.
Nonetheless, Fox News’ Martha MacCallum didn’t hesitate to “go there” after the Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage in all 50 states.
Martha MacCallum asked Fox legal analyst Greta Van Susteren:
“So, suppose three people say, ‘we want to be a marriage. We’re three people, we love each other and we want to be married.’ What’s to prevent that under this?”
Van Susteren replied:
“I don’t know that there is. I mean, that will have to wind up in the Supreme Court.”
While some might bridle at the insinuation that gay marriage is tantamount to polygamy, there is a legal principle at stake. In his dissent on the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, Chief Justice John Roberts raised the same question: MORE
You know of course that’s bound to happen guaranteed because of today’s insane decision by SCOTUS. And the trannies aren’t far behind as well as polygamy etc.
I want 2 wives but my present wife said no. But this does mean Muslims can marry thier goats.
So many butthurt hateful conservative are upset that love won.
Ron beat me to it. Hooray for throuples! Only hot chicks need apply.
On the other hand, Larry probably wishes he had 2 assholes.
@Larry the Walking Faggot, we’re sure you know what butt hurt feels like.
And the jigaboo igloo is all dressed up in the fag rainbow tonite…
How much did that fookin’ light show cost us?
Larry y’all should get married in a mosque.
He does – one is on his face, just below his nose.
Look up the second definition and just go with it.
/ˈmerij/
2. a combination or mixture of two or more elements.
You’re a frickin priest by putting screws to wood.
why does less then 4% of the population and 25% of the Supreme Court have any say in the definition of marriage?….mow mow mow
If marriage can be redefined to mean anything we want it to mean, it can equally mean nothing at all.
That’s the INEVITABLE course we’re on now that we’re officially in the Age of Arbitrary Law.
Why would any future claim, want or interest concerning marriage now have to go before the Supreme Court? Their ruling is very clear that anything goes. It is, according to them, settled science. Just say the words love, equality and the 14th Amendment and then line up for a state-issued licence! Plus as a bonus get your picture in the announcement section of the local rag! Congratulations on all your future marital endeavors!
Marriage can now become all kinds of combinations of people. I fear for our children. They might learn to to be sex objects to everyone. There is a real danger because the schools will be required to teach homosexual marriage and soon polygamy. Will incest be far behind? Children will learn that their bodies are made for others with no boundaries. Traditional same sex friendship will be difficult because of sexual tension. There will be no childhood. This is seriously evil.
I just wrote a big post that disappeared. Boy am I pissed. So I’ll make it short now. This is a distraction. Same as all the shit that’s been happening for the last couple weeks. I have zero fucks left. His end game right now is our guns. And he’ll do anything to get them. I’m tired of this dick being 3 steps ahead of us. Look out, he’s got his pen.
man, woman. ( no caps), pair up. Go rule the world.
Brad,
I share your frustration. The reason he and the Left are 3 steps ahead is because our side largely, still, has not accepted that he and the Left really want to destroy us. Utterly. There is no “common ground” anymore. He and the Left usurp our language and constructs and use it against us. They hold us to our principles and we comply, because we believe in PRINCIPLES. We make the mistake of believing they, too, share the same. I’ve said it before – the only way any of this makes sense is if you believe the absolute worst about Obama and his administration.
…And I have another 30 pounds of ‘precious metals’ on the way.
Welcome to marriage…. and DIVORCE!
Be careful what you wish for 😉
Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner wants to get married again, only he/she cannot decide which gender his/her spouse should be. So Bruce/Caitlyn wants to marry one of each. And another transgender/transconfused, just in case. Bruce/Caitlyn is doing this for love, spiritual support, etc. etc. bullshit bullshit (all that stuff the SCOTUS had in its majority opinion in lieu of actual logic), so he/she can legally do this, right? After all, this makes Bruce/Caitlyn happy and fulfilled, and “feelin’ good Willis” is now apparently a fundamental right.
Who is the supreme court to stand in the way of a man and his 2- 5 women? And that watermelon with the hole on the side.
Where does the ring go if you want to marry your goat?
Why is the government in the marriage issue at all? This is a specific states’ rights issue. Using the logic of the Supreme Court, if one state passes a law, all other states must reciprocate? I suppose since Colorado has legalized pot, the other 49 states must legalize it as well? And if New York bans 40 oz sodas state wide, will Georgia have to do the same? What two people do in their lives is their business, but what the Court has just done is set up a Constitutional crisis. What happens when the Court’s perceived rights read into the Fourteenth Amendment collide head on with the ENUMERATED rights listed in the First Amendment? Which Amendment carries greater weight? And if the First Amendment does not mean what it clearly states, what about the Second? Third? Fourth? Stupid judges operating on public pressure, political ideology, and short-sighted emotion have really screwed the pooch on this one.