4 Apr 2013 4:06 pm
Polygamy. Perhaps a "right" marriage to close relatives or even minors. So you think there's a danger that if marriage between two people of the same sex is found to be a right, then we'll head right down that old slippery slope to polygamy and people marrying members of their immediate family or even children? And you think that the laws that would make those things legal would be likely to pass any legislature, or be upheld by any court? Of course. Once a moral and Constitutional compass has been lost, it will spin in unpredictable and disastrous directions. Olsen is arguing that there is a "right" to homosexual marriage simply because of "equality" and love. Well heck, why not polygamy? Why not marriage between a mother and her son? And no one has the slightest idea what the effect will be on children adopted or "had" by homosexual couples, but the liberal-left hasn't expressed any concern; just empty assurances. Almost certainly even more degradation to the hugely important institution of marriage. If marriage is so hugely important then why aren't divorce and infidelity illegal? If anyone has degraded the 'hugely important institution of marriage' it's the members of your own party. People like David Vitter, John Ensign, Newt Gingrich, Mark Sanford, Larry Craig.....I could go on for days. Examples of bad behavior aren't nearly as destructive as the broad values espoused by the liberal left for decades; marriage is like slavery. Divorce is good for children. A woman shouldn't respect and stay with a man when things get a little tough, simply because she married him! Oh no, dump the guy and fulfill yourself by being single! All these values were pushed or at the very least given very serious consideration by your side when I was younger. Not to mention the laws passed at your side's demand. One-party divorce. Holy cow, what a disaster, especially for women. Where did I "approve" of it? Lie much? When you brushed off New York gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino's sending out of a bestiality video to the people on his e-mail contact list as just 'one animal porno', or just a couple of short clips meant as a joke. You apparently thought that there was nothing wrong with a man running for governor of the state of New York e-mailing people 'woman on horse' videos. So what else am I to conclude but that you approve of that type of filth? That doesn't mean I "approve" at all; I don't want anyone pushed out of a serious job or possible job because of something sent in bad taste in what he thought was a private situation. That's something your side excels at; destroying opponents for relatively frivolous reasons while defending rapists, felons and other truly despicable miscreants. Oh gosh, you've done that, haven't you. And given that I did note it was in very poor taste, you're smearing me by claiming I "approved" of bestiality. How surprising.