Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license for husband and his two "wives"

For centuries, polygamy has been a heterosexual practice. How does homosexual marriage lead to polygamy?

The number 2 no longer is relevent. 2 was the minimum number required to procreate, to insure future generations. No matter how many same sex individuals are in a " group" no future generations are needed.

2 is no longer relevent.

Name one other contact exclusive to two individuals.

I'll help you out


None
 
For centuries, polygamy has been a heterosexual practice. How does homosexual marriage lead to polygamy?

The number 2 no longer is relevent. 2 was the minimum number required to procreate, to insure future generations. No matter how many same sex individuals are in a " group" no future generations are needed.

2 is no longer relevent.

Name one other contact exclusive to two individuals.

I'll help you out


None
Two is still very much in force. That didn't change so stop pretending that it did.
 
For centuries, polygamy has been a heterosexual practice. How does homosexual marriage lead to polygamy?

The number 2 no longer is relevent. 2 was the minimum number required to procreate, to insure future generations. No matter how many same sex individuals are in a " group" no future generations are needed.

2 is no longer relevent.

Name one other contact exclusive to two individuals.

I'll help you out


None
Two is still very much in force. That didn't change so stop pretending that it did.

it will.
 
For centuries, polygamy has been a heterosexual practice. How does homosexual marriage lead to polygamy?

The number 2 no longer is relevent. 2 was the minimum number required to procreate, to insure future generations. No matter how many same sex individuals are in a " group" no future generations are needed.

2 is no longer relevent.

Name one other contact exclusive to two individuals.

I'll help you out


None
Two is still very much in force. That didn't change so stop pretending that it did.

it will.
Maybe in time but what fucking difference does that make to you? Oh right, none.
 
Why not?

As long as we are pretending "marriage" means something other than what it means, why not extend it further?

Once you throw out the actual definition, you have no standards by which to define it. What excuse can you come up with to stop at any particular point?

Actually, though rare, a few more societies in history have defined "marriage" as between a man and multiple wives, than have defined it as between two men or two women.

And remember, it only takes one state (or locality) to allow polygamous marriage, then the 14th amendment kicks in and all states must allow it, according to the Supreme Court.

The race to the bottom has started.

------------------------------------------------

Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license - Yahoo News

Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license

Associated Press
By MATT VOLZ
47 minutes ago

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana man has applied for a marriage license so he can legally wed his second wife.

Nathan Collier of Billings said Wednesday that last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage inspired him to try to force the acceptance of polygamous marriages.

He says he'll sue the state if his application is rejected.

Collier says Yellowstone County Courthouse officials initially denied the application Tuesday. When he told officials he planned to sue, they said they would consult with the county attorney before giving him a final answer.

14th Amendment usurpers!!

Why is the US government polyphobic?
 
This decision didn't reverse anything. All it did was extend legal monogamy to same sex couples.
Then it can be extended further. There's no reason to limit it to two people, you nor anyone else has ever offered a reason.
 
i hope that someday soon, men will be allowed to marry/purchase a russian bride for about $42.95 on line, and then the brides will be shipped to their homes here via UPS.

Hater...I noticed you didn't say "Russian brides and/or LGBT humans".
Shame
 
Why not?

As long as we are pretending "marriage" means something other than what it means, why not extend it further?

Once you throw out the actual definition, you have no standards by which to define it. What excuse can you come up with to stop at any particular point?

Actually, though rare, a few more societies in history have defined "marriage" as between a man and multiple wives, than have defined it as between two men or two women.

And remember, it only takes one state (or locality) to allow polygamous marriage, then the 14th amendment kicks in and all states must allow it, according to the Supreme Court.

The race to the bottom has started.

------------------------------------------------

Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license - Yahoo News

Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license

Associated Press
By MATT VOLZ
47 minutes ago

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana man has applied for a marriage license so he can legally wed his second wife.

Nathan Collier of Billings said Wednesday that last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage inspired him to try to force the acceptance of polygamous marriages.

He says he'll sue the state if his application is rejected.

Collier says Yellowstone County Courthouse officials initially denied the application Tuesday. When he told officials he planned to sue, they said they would consult with the county attorney before giving him a final answer.
whats the point of getting married at this point? dont most of them eventually wind up in divorce? we may as well rent out a spouse till we get sick of them, either that or just take them to the wal-mart return counter and exchange them for an inflatable doll or manican.
 
This decision didn't reverse anything. All it did was extend legal monogamy to same sex couples.
Then it can be extended further. There's no reason to limit it to two people, you nor anyone else has ever offered a reason.

It was the COURT that decided to give same sex couples equal marriage rights. Why can't you people understand that?

We allowed women to vote,and then we lowered the voting age to 18. That hasn't ended up with 10 year olds voting.
 
This decision didn't reverse anything. All it did was extend legal monogamy to same sex couples.
Then it can be extended further. There's no reason to limit it to two people, you nor anyone else has ever offered a reason.

It was the COURT that decided to give same sex couples equal marriage rights. Why can't you people understand that?

We allowed women to vote,and then we lowered the voting age to 18. That hasn't ended up with 10 year olds voting.
 
For centuries, polygamy has been a heterosexual practice. How does homosexual marriage lead to polygamy?

The number 2 no longer is relevent. 2 was the minimum number required to procreate, to insure future generations. No matter how many same sex individuals are in a " group" no future generations are needed.

2 is no longer relevent.

Name one other contact exclusive to two individuals.

I'll help you out


None

Two remains relevant because Polygamy is against the law.....Homosexual relationships was not against the law

The slippery slope of heterosexual marriages has not led to polygamy despite the fact that polygamous marriages are heterosexual
 
This decision didn't reverse anything. All it did was extend legal monogamy to same sex couples.
Then it can be extended further. There's no reason to limit it to two people, you nor anyone else has ever offered a reason.

It was the COURT that decided to give same sex couples equal marriage rights. Why can't you people understand that?

We allowed women to vote,and then we lowered the voting age to 18. That hasn't ended up with 10 year olds voting.
 
To quote Jon Stewart:

People are born homosexual, they are not born polygamous
 
For centuries, polygamy has been a heterosexual practice. How does homosexual marriage lead to polygamy?

The number 2 no longer is relevent. 2 was the minimum number required to procreate, to insure future generations. No matter how many same sex individuals are in a " group" no future generations are needed.

2 is no longer relevent.

Name one other contact exclusive to two individuals.

I'll help you out


None

Two remains relevant because Polygamy is against the law.....Homosexual relationships was not against the law

The slippery slope of heterosexual marriages has not led to polygamy despite the fact that polygamous marriages are heterosexual

Arguing tradition is crazy now. There is no reason to fight it.

To paraphrase a Supreme Court Justice

If Tom love Sue and Tom loves Bill, why can Tom Marry Sue but not Marry Bill?
 

Forum List

Back
Top