Apparently, back in October \u201922 some judge in NY decided that the laws relating to \u2026 ahem \u2026 \u201chomosexual marriage\u201d must also apply to \u2026 wait for it \u2026 polyamory as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What is \u201cpolyamory,\u201d you (Other Person, You) ask? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Well, simply stated, it is the fully-disclosed, consensually-agreed sharing of genitals with multiple people and calling the arrangement a relationship, as opposed to indiscriminate unlicensed whoobanging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Jesus Lord, methinks mankind is ready BUT YOU SAID IT {Matthew 24:36<\/em>}<\/p>\n\n\n\n Matt Walsh (don\u2019t agree with everything but methinks he gets a lottabit right) had a conversation with Joe Rogan (and how do you lose an argument to a pothead digress) during which he (Walsh) didn\u2019t have a good answer to Rogan\u2019s question re homosexual (i.e., gay\/lesbian) \u201cmarriage\u201d and its impact on traditional (i.e., man\/woman no not trans but the actual, real, genuine, biological, genetically-affirmed type of woman) marriage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That one\u2019s easy. I\u2019m a little embarrassed Mr. Walsh (of Johnny the Walrus fame) got so tripped up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ready?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Because it changes the definition of marriage. Just like trans persons want to change the definition of \u201cwoman.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n A woman is a biological female who has matured to adulthood. See how easy that is?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Marriage is the legal union of a man and a woman recognized by the state, historically for purposes of paternity, inheritance, and the enforcement of contracts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I get it. Homosexual relationships would like the same protections. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And they had that. Civil unions. Elton John even said (before he was shouted down) civil unions were for gays\/lesbians, marriage was for straights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem? Civil unions only had the rights conferred by the states that recognized them, but lacked similar protections offered for marriage (\u00e1 la, the straights) at the federal level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The solution? Extend federal protections to civil unions. There. Done. Welcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Every gets happy\u2014 well, no, because both are institutions and who wants to be institutionalized? but this entire issue could have been dealt with in a manner to respect religious liberty (\u00e1 la traditional marriage) while affording the secular protections of traditional marriage to civil unions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why is this hard?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Because, like the trans argument, there is a strong desire among the Alphabet People to legitimize the illegitimate, to rationalize the irrational, and normalize the abnormal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes other mammals exhibit homosexual behavior in the wild but it is not normal<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes two men\/women can raise children together as a family but it is not normal<\/em>, no more so than the bastardization of black children born in the US at the rate of 80 percent. It is not normal<\/em> for children to be raised without fathers but it is becoming normalized<\/em> due to the poor decision-making of a certain a-hem<\/em> class of women. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes a 7-year-old boy can dress up as a drag qeen (\u2018cuz that ain\u2019t \u201cU\u201d boo) but it is not normal<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes teens can experience gender dysfunction but modern society is hyper-sexualized so no wonder<\/em> kids are confused. It is not normal<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What happened to the debt owed to basic human biology? Yeh, some straight couples are infertile but it is not normal<\/em>. For those intents and purposes, allllllllllll homosexual couples are infertile \u2026 Disney \u2014 that corrupted bastion of kid-friendly entertainment \u2014 is mouse turned rat, with its box-office busted wokeism tropes. No parent (at least, no father) knowingly pays money for their kid to witness homosexual love in a cartoon. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And what\u2019s with the fat ballerina? Ain\u2019t enough leg strength to get 250 on pointe<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastdayslastday<\/p>\n\n\n\n Get right with HIM. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The writing\u2019s on the wall, then we\u2019ll all be wailing. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Apparently, back in October \u201922 some judge in NY decided that the laws relating to \u2026 ahem \u2026 \u201chomosexual marriage\u201d must also apply to \u2026 wait for it \u2026 polyamory as well. What is \u201cpolyamory,\u201d you (Other Person, You) ask? Well, simply stated, it is the fully-disclosed, consensually-agreed sharing of genitals with multiple people and … <\/p>\n
I don\u2019t think you have the facilities for that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n