Justice Antonin Scalia warned in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision
that the Supreme Court had created “a massive disruption of the current social
order” by striking down a Texas law barring sodomy. He went on to write: “State
laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution,
masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity … every single
one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision.”
Sure enough, Scalia’s slippery slope argument has come to pass.
Three men from Thailand who engage in sex with other men have “married,”
not to three other men, but to each other “in what is thought to be the world’s
first three-way same-sex marriage.”
If same-sex sexualists argue that being ‘gay’ is innate, then what
can be wrong with this? If it’s all about choice, then what can be wrong with
this? If three men can marry, why not four or five, or about marriage to
brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.