Sicilianthing

As Justice Antonin Scalia presciently noted in his dissent in the socially destructive Lawrence v. Texas decision:

State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices.

Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding.

Scalia was totally correct.

Once it became impossible for a state to legislate based on commonly held morality,it was off to the races.

How can it be illegal to have sex on the hood of your car in a school parking lot? Why can’t you go shopping while totally naked?

The first signs are appearing.

A “throuple” of Massachusetts lesbians has decided to wed. And the very same people who were arguing that Scalia was just a crazy right winger making stuff up are now saying strangely familiar things like this:

But legalizing consensual adult polygamy wouldn’t legalize rape or child abuse. In fact, it would make those crimes easier to combat.

Right now, all polygamous families, including the healthy, responsible ones, are driven into hiding (notwithstanding the openly polygamous Brown family on TLC’s Sister Wives, that is).

In the resulting isolation, crime and abuse can flourish unimpeded.

Children in polygamous communities are taught to fear the police and are not likely to report an abusive neighbor if they suspect their own parents might be caught up in a subsequent criminal investigation.

In a United States with legalized polygamy, responsible plural families could emerge from the shadows—making it easier for authorities to zero in on the criminals who remain there.

I don’t know how the author here managed to miss the tried, true, and utterly bullsh** arguments of inheritance and hospital visitation.

And sometimes there are stunning admissions, like this from The Daily Beast titled Were Christians Right About Gay Marriage All Along:

At the same time, there is some truth to the conservative claim that gay marriage is changing, not just expanding, marriage. According to a 2013 study, about half of gay marriages surveyed (admittedly, the study was conducted in San Francisco) were not strictly monogamous.

This fact is well-known in the gay community—indeed, we assume it’s more like three-quarters.

But it’s been fascinating to see how my straight friends react to it.

Some feel they’ve been duped: They were fighting for marriage equality, not marriage redefinition.

Others feel downright envious, as if gays are getting a better deal, one that wouldn’t work for straight couples. Maybe they’re right; women are from Venus, after all. Right?

If you think about it, actual monogamy has never been the Western norm.

A monogamous ideal, sure—but men could always sleep around, hire prostitutes, and even have long-term affairs with few societal consequences.

After all, it’s not single men who’ve made prostitution the world’s oldest profession.
…
“Marriage will never set us free,” wrote academics Dean Spade and Craig Wilse last September, just as the current wave was getting going.

For them, as for 30 years of radical critics including Yasmin Nair, Michael Warner, Lisa Duggan, John D’Emilio, Katherine Franke, Kenyon Farrow, Gayle Rubin, Sally Kohn, and the “Against Equality” collective, same-sex marriage is a step backward for LGBTQ people and others whose agenda is liberation rather than assimilation.

Why? Because marriage is a patriarchal, sexist institution that should be discarded rather than reformed.

Because it is, as Spade and Wilse say, a “tool of social control used by governments to regulate sexuality and family formation.”

Because it has, in the past, been a tool of racism and colonialism, and in the present, is a means of rationing health care. This is, as Warner named it, “the trouble with normal.”

I never get tired of quoting from Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput’s Lenten reflection titled A Thread for Weaving Joy:

As the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb observed more than a decade ago, “What was once stigmatized as deviant behavior is now tolerated and even sanctioned; what was once regarded as abnormal has been normalized.”

But even more importantly, she added, “As deviancy is normalized, so what was once normal becomes deviant. The kind of family that has been regarded for centuries as natural and moral — the ‘bourgeois’ family as it is invidiously called — is now seen as pathological” and exclusionary, concealing the worst forms of psychic and physical oppression.6

My point is this: Evil talks about tolerance only when it’s weak. When it gains the upper hand, its vanity always requires the destruction of the good and the innocent, because the example of good and innocent lives is an ongoing witness against it. So it always has been. So it always will be.

Unless there is a seismic shift in the US Supreme Court, marriage, as it has been understood for some thousands of years across hundreds of cultures will disappear from the United States.

skott Loc: Bama

Sounds like you missed your facts. Polygamy has been in existence for thousands of years and was condoned in the Bible and in the Torah.
Also, we have not made fornication illegal in the U.S.A. This must be pick and chose morality.

Caboose Loc: South Carolina

Yes Christians were right. But moreover God was right.

Sicilianthing

____________________________________
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

You know the Score Skott, stop acting !
This is about where you draw the lines....

Pretty soon you can marry your KIDS ? your Fuc*ing Tree or your Dog ?

Where do you draw the lines in society on morality ?

Sicilianthing

_________________________
Yes Sir and oh how I thank God, my true and only 1 Christian God !

skott Loc: Bama

How about lying? Let's make the easiest morality the harshest penalty. You lie, you die.
Why the sexual hangups? Part of morality in the Bible is not judging, and forgiveness. Where is yours? Good Christian. The old testament is not what Christians need to really look at. How about starting with Christs teachings and examples!?!

Sicilianthing

________________________________
Stop drifting Skott ... so be it...
the bible, past and present, christ and God and 5,000 religions on earth across time only recognize Marriage as between
Male and
Female for the purpose of
ProCreation !

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

This is the argument that many of us have been presenting for some time. When I have stated on OPP that the LGBTQ activists did not want to get married but to remove the concept of marriage by destroying the definition of marriage as one man and one woman, and changing it to mean what ever people wanted it to mean, I and others with the same logical conclusion have been called hateful, evil homophobes, and often told that those who say what we have said are mentally ill. They have redefined our concerns to say homophobia is a mental illness which, because it is incurable, should require institutionalization of those people who believe it, or arrested for hate speech. Scalia, whose intellect is widely admired and whose logical presentation is second to none, has, in his finding, echoed what many have said for years. Fortunately he is much more capable of presenting his thoughts more logically than the rest of us. Hopefully people will pay attention before it is too late.

Sicilianthing

________________________________________
I agree, and again I point out...
The
Lines are
being
Drawn !

Anigav6969

Should two people who have no plans to procreate or cannot be allowed to marry ? Also, what about men with multiple wives ? That is okay in many religious books, including the bible ....

skott Loc: Bama

Absolutely not true! Solomon had 400 wives and 700 concubines. The Bible also calls for a brother to marry his sister in law should his brother die. Not singular, one men and one woman, or for procreation.

skott Loc: Bama

It would be really nice if the right would stop rewriting the Bible in their image.

Sicilianthing

______________________________
Civil unions are ok... for those Unconstitutional tax and living arrangements all you believe in....

But don't re define Marriage !

Sicilianthing

______________________________________
Please have the
Jewish Geniuses weigh in here.... so they can explain the finite intricacies of that formula if you Fuc* it up in the Gene Pool !

WTF man !

skott Loc: Bama

It has been redefined as one man one woman for procreation, by your side.