Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 161 to 163 of 163

Thread: Gay Marriage ruling

  1. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    probably not the best place for it - but a really funny parody of the gay marriage = bestiality argument
    The animal-love thing has always been retardedly off-base.

    However, the plural-marriage argument (polygamy) is absolutely valid to be made now. And I'd guess it very soon will be.

    I'd also say that laws against marriage within a family (i.e. adult incest) will also be challenged, via two constenting adult relations.

    And finally, I'd wager eventually the "age of consent" for marriage will be fought in court as well (but will lose, despite child-consent being legally lowered in a host of other issues, i.e. see abortion rights).

    If the law (and the concepts behind the law) is consistent, the first two (polygamy and adult consentual incest) will both win, as the very same arguments used to legally win gay marriage also stand in those circumstances as well.

  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by Churchill View Post
    The animal-love thing has always been retardedly off-base.

    However, the plural-marriage argument (polygamy) is absolutely valid to be made now. And I'd guess it very soon will be.

    I'd also say that laws against marriage within a family (i.e. adult incest) will also be challenged, via two constenting adult relations.

    And finally, I'd wager eventually the "age of consent" for marriage will be fought in court as well (but will lose, despite child-consent being legally lowered in a host of other issues, i.e. see abortion rights).

    If the law (and the concepts behind the law) is consistent, the first two (polygamy and adult consentual incest) will both win, as the very same arguments used to legally win gay marriage also stand in those circumstances as well.
    Polygamy argument should especially win for some who can add the claim that polygamy is required by their religion. While the free exercise of religion argument was unsuccessful 135 years ago in Reynolds v. US, free exercise plus whatever the incoherent argument that carries the day in DOMA case and Lawrence was should do the trick. Religious Polygamists now have an additional right that protects their activity, so that should satisfy Scalia according to his (weak) opinion in Employment Division v. Smth.

  3. #163
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    dunwoody, ga ! !
    Posts
    14,424
    the fact that this is such a huge political issue is very sad as we are an otherwise forward thinking country.
    who am i to tell someone..anyone...they can't get married...two adults wanna get married...congrats ! ! :






    cheers ~ ~

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us