| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Shocking ! Gay Marriage Ruling: Justices Suggest Polygamy Next Due To The New Legal Theory Could Support Plural and Even Incestuous Marriages
Gay Marriage Ruling: Justices Suggest Polygamy Next
WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 27, 2015): Although little noted in news reports of the gay marriage decision, the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage ruling, according to two different Justices as well as many legal experts, opens the door wide and could provide the legal basis for the legalization of plural marriages, and Politico is already calling for it to be used to achieve the full legalization of polygamy.
gay marriage vs polygamy
Indeed, the legal theory that marriage is a fundamental constitutional right – a liberty interest – could even require the legalization of incestuous marriages between consenting adults, especially same-sex unions – like those between a mother and adult daughter or between two adult brothers – where there is no legitimate concern about the risks of inbred offspring, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf.
Chief Justice John Roberts was very clear in his prediction on gay marriage: “It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage. If ‘[t]here is dignity in the bond between two men or two women who seek to marry and in their autonomy to make such profound choices,’ why would there be any less dignity in the bond between three people who, in exercising their autonomy, seek to make the profound choice to marry? If a same-sex couple has the constitutional right to marry because their children would otherwise ‘suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser,’ why wouldn’t the same reasoning apply to a family of three or more persons raising children? If not having the opportunity to marry ‘serves to disrespect and subordinate’ gay and lesbian couples, why wouldn’t the same ‘imposition of this disability,’ serve to disrespect and subordinate people who find fulfillment in polyamorous relationships?”
Roberts’ opinion cites a recent decision which struck down the criminalization of cohabitation in a plural-wife arrangement in Utah, saying: “One immediate question invited by the majority’s position is whether States may retain the definition of marriage as a union of two people. Cf. Brown v. Buhman.”
It is also noteworthy that Justice Antonin Scalia, in his dissent in an earlier gay rights case, repeatedly compared laws prohibiting same sex marriage with those prohibiting polygamy and adult incest. READ MORE!
It’s Time to Legalize Polygamy?
Why group marriage is the next horizon of social liberalism.
Welcome to the exciting new world of the slippery slope. With the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling this Friday legalizing same sex marriage in all 50 states, social liberalism has achieved one of its central goals. A right seemingly unthinkable two decades ago has now been broadly applied to a whole new class of citizens. Following on the rejection of interracial marriage bans in the 20th Century, the Supreme Court decision clearly shows that marriage should be a broadly applicable right—one that forces the government to recognize, as Friday’s decision said, a private couple’s “love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family.
The question presents itself: Where does the next advance come? The answer is going to make nearly everyone uncomfortable: Now that we’ve defined that love and devotion and family isn’t driven by gender alone, why should it be limited to just two individuals? The most natural advance next for marriage lies in legalized polygamy—yet many of the same people who pressed for marriage equality for gay couples oppose it READ MORE
What do you think about all of this? The new world order, the new Amerika?
Looking forward to your comments!
What the People don’t realize is that in 1871, a coup took place in the US that replaced a nation with sovereign boundaries with that of a CORPORATION.
Refer to any UNITED STATES CODE (USC) and note the capitalization; this is evidence of a corporation, not a Republic. For example, In US Title 28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C), it is unequivocally stated that the UNITED STATES is a corporation … Translation: the Corporation is NOT a separate and distinct entity; it is not disconnected from the government; it IS the US government and EVERY Senator, Judge and President knows this.
The Supreme Court of today is part of this CORPORATION and has nine administrators. These people are not real judges, and ‘Congress’ (Senate/House) are not Senators and Representatives of the People, they are administrators. And lastly, the so-called ‘President’ is not a president of a nation but a CEO of a company known as the ‘United States’, a CEO that is no different than every other CEO of a corporation.
Bottomline: Corporations, CEOs & administrators do NOT make, affirm nor enforce laws. Null and void.
What the NoPremes did was overturn a previous ADMINISTRATIVE directive from Congress. That is all. Churches are not obligated to violate their faith or edicts due to a CORPORATE directive or demand. States issue ‘marriage licenses’ and churches etc perform holy matrimony’s. State-issued marriages performed by administrative ‘judges’ is not the same as holy matrimony’s and the People need to wake up to this ridiculous coup and its absurd PC-substitution ruse on holy matrimony’s, while churches etc need to stop playing into the PC-crapness of this insane LIE and HOAX being perpetrated and stand their ground.