Once they allow presist and rabbis and clerics to marry animals, they will allow them to marry yougn boys for sex. So they are not called pedophiles. When will this snowball idology end.
Civil rights pioneers! http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3657212/Woman-marries-her-dead-fianc.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News Woman marries her dead fiancé A GRIEVING woman has married the love of her life two years after he was killed in a car crash. An obscure law allowed Karen Jumeaux, 22, to wed Anthony Maillot even though he is dead. She was granted special permission to tie the knot because she could prove she and Anthony were already planning the ceremony.
First sex dolls, than cartoon characters! http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1873995.ece Loony toon wedding plan A BARMY Japanese man has started a campaign to legalise marriages between humans and CARTOON CHARACTERS. The cartoon lover started the petition because he said he feels more at ease in the "two dimensional world". And hundreds of like-minded people have signed up to his website. Comic books are hugely popular in Japan, with some fictional characters becoming celebrities or even SEX symbols.
Animals lack the ability to consent, therefore, they can not enter a marriage contract, which involves consenting....It's the same reason toasters and children can not get married in the US
It wont be long before a law will be passed allowing parents to marry their children, or like Muhammad, allow adults to have intercourse with children.We have really opened a big can or worms with pretending to legalise marriage with two people of the same sex. And worse, allow them to adopt children!
So, are you saying you oppose legalized marriage for parents and children? Bigot! http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2010/12/incest_is_cancer.single.html
Nope, I'm saying "There's no need for such a law: a kinship already exists between parents and their children." I'm not opposing it; merely explaining that it isn't necessary. However, if someone wants it ... good luck to them ... let them have it (even though it's totally unnecessary).
You may honestly feel it's OK for Parents and kids to marry ("good luck to them!") but I think you can see that for every social conservative who says that gay marriage will lead to incest marriages and polygamy; there is a gay marriage supporter who is willing to prove them right.
How stupid are people who cannot understand that the fundamental root of any contractual relationship is consent? Gay people consent to enter into the contract of marriage. Animals cannot consent. Children cannot consent. Inanimate objects cannot consent. One has to think, at this point, that anti-marriage-liberty bigots are simply trolling, or lying to themselves. I can't see that a functioning adult could perform the basic functions of living in society (buying and selling, traveling from place to place, working at a job, etc) without understanding such a simple concept as consent.
The original defiition was the sale of a daughter by her father to another man....consent never even entered into thought until well into the 1800's.
Animals are property. It would be like returning to the days of "traditional marriage" when the wife was property.
That is the strawman. Once courts started dismantling the traditional definition of one man/one woman marriage to accomodate same-sex marriages, who on this planet was surprised that first the bigamists (slippery slope argument, we were told) and now these sick animal people (another slippery slope argument, we were told) have come to stand in the same line as the gays? Who's next in line? That there are those seemingly ignorant of the momentum opening this pandora's box has created is, in fact, the slippery slope.
Animals cannot consent, and therefore marriage between a human and an animal will never be permitted.
Okay then, if consent is the only question, then would you not have to allow for polygamy? If it is two women and one man, if they are all consenting, what is wrong with that? What is wrong if it is 3 men? They all consent, so you have to allow them to do it?
I don't have an issue with that, my problem is that if something happens to the man and he cannot consent to say, surgery, which wife has the authority to rule? It would lead to all kinds of problems, and I also believe that marriage should be between only two people.
If you can find an animal that has the intelligence capable of understanding human emotions and concepts, including marriage, fidelity, honesty, and trust, and you can prove to me that it understands marriage and what is happening, I'd tell you to go to town. If an animal is advanced enough to figure out that much, it can probably contribute to society. Otherwise, I'm just going to saddle up that horsey and ride him roughshod over your straw man, right on down to the bottom of your slippery slope and back up again.
This argument ignores ALL the nuances of the issue. An animal is mentally unable to consent to marriage. They can't even talk. Someone who is gay is still a human being and as long as they are a consenting adult, this makes the issue very different to zoophilia.