- Oct 23, 2012
- 6,462
- 3,604
Liberals are outraged that some localities are refusing to comply with the Supreme Court's new Dred Scott ruling, i.e., its ruling on gay marriage. They scream "equal protection under the law."
But, what a minute! How about "equal protection under the law" for men whose "sexual orientation" is to have sex with consenting pubescent preteens? How about "equal protection" for people whose "sexual orientation" is to have sex with animals? How about "equal protection" for people whose "sexual orientation" is to have multiple wives purely for sexual enjoyment and not for any religious purposes?
"But those things are all illegal," say liberals. So what: Just make them legal. Homosexuality used to be illegal too, until 2003 when the Supreme Court ignored all precedent and decided that it should now be legal. So just pass new laws or get the Supreme Court to legalize sex with consenting pubescent preteens, beastiality, and polygamy. If one perversion can be legalized, other perversions should be legalized. It is discriminatory and unfair to allow homosexuals to love and marry but to deny this "fundamental right" to adults and pubescent pubescent who merely want to love and marry each other, to adults and animals who merely want to love and marry each other, and to men and multiple women who merely want to love and marry.
"But preteen girls can't give proper consent, nor can animals." First off, many pubescent 11- and 12-year-old girls are more mature and smarter than some 18-year-old boys. So that argument is a non-starter. Second, animals can give their consent in their own way; animals can make it clear that they love their human lover and have no desire to leave. So just change the law to allow animals to consent in their own way. After all, "society has no right to dictate who a person can and can't love or marry, and has no right to judge one type of love to be better or worse than another."
"But the Supreme Court has ruled that polygamy is unconstitutional." So just get the current Supreme Court to overrule that decision, just like you did in 2003 when the Supreme Court ignored all precedent and decided that somehow all state laws against homosexuality were suddenly "unconstitutional."
Some animal lovers and polygamists have already filed lawsuits to be allowed "equal protection under the law." In Europe some liberals have been trying for years to weaken or abolish laws against adult-child sexual relationships between adults and consenting pubescent children. Indeed, some of the scientists who have peddled the "gays are born gay" myth also claim that pedophiles are "born that way" too. It's high time that liberals in America get with their progressive brethren in Europe and push for equal protection for adults and pubescent children who only want to love and marry each other.
But, what a minute! How about "equal protection under the law" for men whose "sexual orientation" is to have sex with consenting pubescent preteens? How about "equal protection" for people whose "sexual orientation" is to have sex with animals? How about "equal protection" for people whose "sexual orientation" is to have multiple wives purely for sexual enjoyment and not for any religious purposes?
"But those things are all illegal," say liberals. So what: Just make them legal. Homosexuality used to be illegal too, until 2003 when the Supreme Court ignored all precedent and decided that it should now be legal. So just pass new laws or get the Supreme Court to legalize sex with consenting pubescent preteens, beastiality, and polygamy. If one perversion can be legalized, other perversions should be legalized. It is discriminatory and unfair to allow homosexuals to love and marry but to deny this "fundamental right" to adults and pubescent pubescent who merely want to love and marry each other, to adults and animals who merely want to love and marry each other, and to men and multiple women who merely want to love and marry.
"But preteen girls can't give proper consent, nor can animals." First off, many pubescent 11- and 12-year-old girls are more mature and smarter than some 18-year-old boys. So that argument is a non-starter. Second, animals can give their consent in their own way; animals can make it clear that they love their human lover and have no desire to leave. So just change the law to allow animals to consent in their own way. After all, "society has no right to dictate who a person can and can't love or marry, and has no right to judge one type of love to be better or worse than another."
"But the Supreme Court has ruled that polygamy is unconstitutional." So just get the current Supreme Court to overrule that decision, just like you did in 2003 when the Supreme Court ignored all precedent and decided that somehow all state laws against homosexuality were suddenly "unconstitutional."
Some animal lovers and polygamists have already filed lawsuits to be allowed "equal protection under the law." In Europe some liberals have been trying for years to weaken or abolish laws against adult-child sexual relationships between adults and consenting pubescent children. Indeed, some of the scientists who have peddled the "gays are born gay" myth also claim that pedophiles are "born that way" too. It's high time that liberals in America get with their progressive brethren in Europe and push for equal protection for adults and pubescent children who only want to love and marry each other.
