Federal Judge To Wisconsin: You Know 'Traditional' Marriage Was Polygamy, Right?

In terms of levels of badness it's clearly different. But at its core the issue is the same: the majority denying some minority group rights. Tyranny of the majority is a terrible way to govern a country. It is only when the majority becomes the minority that they see it. And that always happens at some point. The reason to have rule of law is quite often to specifically circumvent the will of the people. Basically, many times the people's will is morally wrong and/or based on crappy logic or emotion or lack of adequate knowledge, etc. Sometimes it's just plain evil.

 

Those of us who have met that challenge repeatedly can hardly be held responsible for the willful blindness of others.

Well how very interesting. I await your substantiation of this claim with bated breath.

 

When Sarah was unable to conceive Moses was given permission to have a child with Haggar, the Egyptian servant. Now, you don't really think she had a choice in this matter, do you ? At no point was there an option given to her in the Bible. Yet, God approves and blesses Moses.

 

There was no governemt recognition of such marriages. Individuals may have practiced polygamy but the government didnt participate. Legal Marriage in the US has always been between one man and one woman. Marriage throughout history has always been between men and women. Whether its one marriage or multiple marriages, each and every one between a man and a woman. The judge is ignorant of history. A man with 5 wives isnt in one marriage, he is in 5 different marriages, each and every one of them between one man and one woman.

 

????? Heterosexuals havent been required or encouraged to marry for 1000s of years becuase it doesnt cause "harms or negatively effects anyone". Heterosexual marriage is encouraged to improve the wellbeing of children that only they create. To benefit society as a whole. Same sex marriage isnt opposed because it harms society but instead because it provides none of the benefits of heterosexual marriage.
Giving Bill Gates al allotment of food stamps every month doesnt harm or negatively effect anyone, but thats not a justification for supplying Bill Gates with Food stamps.

 

Cant deny rights that have never existed.

 

I often wonder how many of the transgenders are just homosexuals who cant come to accept their sexual orientation. In theory a homosexual man is transformed into a heterosexual woman.

 

Actually she is dead wrong because she is stupid.

There is 50% men 50% women polygamy does not work on a large scale and never has. If every traditional marriage was 10 wives the other 90% of men with no wife would kill the 10% with wives because they are pissed and want a wife. Sure some 1% throughout history when polygamy was legal had multiple wives but for the rest of the 99% it was one wife. Curently there is a lot of strife in the Mideast over this issue. Too many rich men are practicing polygamy and the rest i.e. the vast majority are having trouble finding eligible women to marry.There isn't enough women to go around for polygamy to ever be traditional. Another liberal dip(*)(*)(*)(*) judge.

Look at the bible. Only that absolute top dogs have multiple wives. Everyone else has 1 wife.

 

That was Abraham, Sherlock.

By whom, exactly?

Why wouldn't I?

For one thing, I have no idea why this should be interesting to anyone who isn't retarded enough to think the Bible presents itself as a word-by-word transcript of any conversation other than what it quotes verbatim. For another, I have no idea why I should believe a woman in her position would want any other option.

Chapter and verse, please.

 

and truly traditional marriage was slavery. he knows the point of the phrase he's just being a jerk.

 

What if a colony of six ex-Mormon women who still belived in the fundamental teachings of the Church ask for sperm so all their kids can be related, and they rationalize it on the basis of how Orthodox Mormonism allows their kids to all have the same dad?

 

Traditional polygamy historically. The Muslim Middle East and Africa.

Traditional marriage historically. Basically the rest of the world.

 

They exist whether you acknowledge them or not. You sound like a slaveholder in 1767. How can you deny blacks rights that never existed?

 

Actually a few hundred miles north the rights did in fact exist

 

Saying that it has been practiced doesn't mean its traditional.

You will find few instances of polygamy being traditional in the West. Going all the way back to the ancient Greeks the western tradition has been monogamous marriage.

 

Maybe the judge was referencing Sharia law.

 

Its just cover the far left and their Constitution hating judges use.

 

I'm sure that argument was very persuasive to the slaveholers in 1767. Oh wait, it wasn't. Oddly, for the same reasons people now give for why gay people should not be allowed to marry. And in case you were not aware, circa 2014 gays can marry in many places both inside and outside the US. So I guess, using your own logic, it's all good then. Those rights exist in actual, real-type places. Sweet!

The fact the majority or the government deprives you of your rights does not mean they do not exist. And the fact they have done so for centuries or decades or years does not change that fact.

 

How dare you use facts against liberals.

 

Not to bring up the obvious, but the 14th Amendment is actually part of the Constitution. And it's not the "left" that seems to hate that bit.

 

And as the courts keep telling you, you have to have a constitutional justification for denying a couple the right of marriage. You have none for same sex marriage which is why you keep loosing.

- - - Updated - - -

It's always existed.

 

Your contention is so blatantly incorrect I find it odd you would have even posted it. Have you never heard of the Judeo-Christian tradition and its influence on American law and judicial reasoning?

Incredible.

 

Nowhere in the 14th amendment does it say anything about gay marriage.

Go ahead, point to any quote that you claim makes that statement.

 

Equal protection clause.

 

Ah, but queers aren't equals. They are perverted sickos. The equal protection clause doesn't apply to them.