RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
July 16, 2015 at 4:45 pm
(This post was last modified: July 16, 2015 at 5:46 pm by Anima.)
(July 16, 2015 at 4:27 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote: So first it was a slippery slope into child marriages, and now it's a slippery slope into parent-arranged child marriages.
Seriously, are you fucking stupid?
As for polygamy, as long as everything is consensual between adults and nobody is being abused, mistreated, or neglected, I don't really have any inherent moral problems with that either, and neither does your Gaud, for that matter. Might want to check your bible again, Animal.
Ha ha. As stupid as anyone who may see the obvious can be.
I do not see how you cannot see the very things I have said coming about. People do them now! The only difference is right now the act is considered illegal under a rational basis prohibition, but it is not a major legal step to get there from here. Thanks to the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling marriage restrictions must now pass strict scrutiny and the marriage has be redefined as security and dignity centric. What is the states compelling interest in denying people additional security and dignity?
In fact there is more legal precedence for the recognition of child marriages with and without parental consent than there is for same sex marriage. Lest we forget the idea of marrying for love at 18 years of age or older is historically speaking very new. The concept is not even 100 years old. So as Chief Justice John Roberts Stated, "It is impossible to believe this court will not make the smaller jump having made the larger of same sex marriage."
So you might want to stop with the ad hominem and start considering the unintended consequences of the argument (or lackthereof) you are putting forth and stop worrying about what my Gaud is or is not doing.
