The people driving the gay marriage movement have, for years, been very honest about their intentions. End marriage as an institution. Demanding marriage rights for homosexual couples was always just a step toward that greater goal.
Sorry gay couples who thought “they” really cared about your feelings or believed you had a right to marriage. They want to destroy the rite altogether. They just used you to advance their agenda.
And now, much sooner than I expected, the next shoe has already dropped in the war on marriage. A Federal judge in Utah just struck down the state’s polygamy law as unconstitutional, basing his decision on…(drum-roll) the justification for same sex marriage.
How ironic is that?
The same progressives who have been trying to destroy the institution of marriage for 50 years, and are the driving force behind ruining an institution that inhibits dependence on the state, who are also the champions of using same-sex marriage as a way to undermine it, while making fun of so-called conservative Mormons about polygamy, just won a case making polygamy legal becasue of gay marriage as a way to destroy marriage altogether.
It’s almost as if they planned it that way. (That’s sarcasm, they did.)
And why not? Even heterosexual women married to Democrats take no stock in the institution of marriage. Why would they? They worship dirt-bag Democrats who cheat on their wives, an marry men who support those dirt-bags. With role models like that who needs marriage except as a ladder to a political future in a party that must still be run by men….who continue to cheat on their wives. I guess we know where the real war on women is being waged. And I guess we know a few men who will be looking to hand out a few more ladders right after they move to Utah!
So how will the Tin-foil-hat generals in the progressive bivouac view this development? Multiple wives, multiple husbands? Lots of opportunities to pay back the abortion industry for its support. I don’t really care. They are all hypocrites who ruined entire generations of women and children with their nonsense.
One other question. Who can point to a thriving and enduring free market Republic that did not have one-man one-woman marriage as its primary building block?
