First Gay Marriage, Then Polygamy….

• September 30, 2005

written by Sphagnum
I’m back home and back to blogging, and Seth and others are doing such a great job keeping this site going I wasn’t going to add my hat to the rack, but I just had to throw this article into the mix. Homosexuality always get the comments flying here at SayAnything, so here we go…
The newspaper article in in Dutch, and the translator doesn’t do it justice, so here is a blogger:

The Netherlands and Belgium were the first countries to give full marriage rights to homosexuals. In the United States some politicians propose “civil unions” that give homosexual couples the full benefits and responsibilities of marriage. These civil unions differ from marriage only in name.
Meanwhile in the Netherlands polygamy has been legalised in all but name. Last Friday the first civil union of three partners was registered. Victor de Bruijn (46) from Roosendaal “married” both Bianca (31) and Mirjam (35) in a ceremony before a notary who duly registered their civil union.

So, for those who said gay marriage doesn’t provide some sort of slippery slope that will lead to other things, what do you say now?
If you think we can honestly alter the definition of marriage to include any two persons and keep it from changing any further, I do believe you are mistaken. Polygamy is a much more natural perversion of marriage and one that, I dare say, is more acceptable worldwide. Of course, altering th definition of marriage opens the Pandora’s box of including at least legalizing incestuous marriage as well (“Who are you to say who I can’t love?! Even if it’s my sister…”) What’s next?

Tags: General

http://www.moderninstances.com/ modern instances

The link I provided was to Santorum’s famous “man on dog” quote.
http://peatbog.net/ Sphagnum

Ah, so it is. I didn’t read down that far initially…

Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing.
http://www.moderninstances.com/ modern instances

What’s next?

We already know the answer to that one.
http://peatbog.net/ Sphagnum

I don’t think he mentioned bestiality, did he? Not in the quote I found, unless he mentioned it somewhere else in that interview…
http://republicanbydesign.com/wordpress/2005/10/the-next-marriage-expansion Conservative Culture » B

&heellip; What can we say but watch it to come in the future to a nation near you. I agree with Say Anything Blog on this topic. Once the box is open just about any combination people come up with is fair game. How can you ‘discriminate’ against one while tolerating other possibilities. &heellip;
Keiran Halcyon

Of course, he’s turned out to be 100% right thus far, eh? The only thing left on his list is incest, eh?

And legitimized bestiality, yes.
http://peatbog.net/ Sphagnum

Ha, good one MI.

And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.

Of course, he’s turned out to be 100% right thus far, eh? The only thing left on his list is incest, eh?

SayAnythingBlog.com

First Gay Marriage, Then Polygamy….

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments