Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
now that the supreme court has established that marriage is not?
solely between one man and one woman, won't the masses be happy? shouldn't the same rule apply to men who want multiple wives and women who want multiple husbands and men and women who want multiple partners? couldn't the same be said for those that choose to marry 13 year old people like they did 100 and 200 years ago? shouldn't smart lawyers get busy? will holder bless this too. with multiple partners, can they all be claimed on income tax?
12 Answers
- Anonymous7 years agoFavorite Answer
Bingo - All the Supreme Court did was open up a totally new can of worms! I don't care HOW you add it up...... To me, any "marriage" not between a man and woman.... is a joke! Marriage, primarily has always been defined within the context of the traditional family unit..... man, women/children! Lets keep it that way. If the gays want equal financial benefits via civil union.... work it out, but don't define their relationship as a "marriage!"
Source(s): Reality - Awareness of! - Anonymous7 years ago
It was wrong all along for the law to inhibit the happiness people feel w/ the person they love. It simply took some centuries to get past the right wing obstruction that confuses the biblical canon law as what the law of the land should be.
The ethos has been evolving gradually to accept what the SC decided. It's a story of repetition ... the right wing tries to dictate their opinion of morality while it obstructed the eventual conclusion which was against their wishes.
It's yet another example how the country moved ahead despite the obstacle course the reps fashioned.
- Brian BLv 77 years ago
How do you get from Marriage is not based on the sexes of the 2 parties involved to marriage is any group of people of any number or that marriage is acceptable for minors? This isn't even a slippery slope argument, but just an illogical jump.
- justaLv 77 years ago
Two consenting adults. Three little words that takes all the worry away.
Besides, who really thinks that there are masses of men out there who want multiple wives, most can't handle the one they have.
And you really think women want to pick up socks from a dozen men? Honey, you have a problem, and I can tell you aren't married or you'd know that.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- ?Lv 57 years ago
Nobody should be allowed to marry animals-unless the animal is a dog and it humps your leg. That is clear permission.
- ?Lv 77 years ago
Liberals have systematically destroyed every element of what made us a civilized society.
Now humans can behave like animals and copulate with anything and everything, with the full support of the government.
The sanctity of monogamous marriage was the primary institution that differentiated civilized humans from savages, cave men, and animals.
Today we have ghettos full of children who don't know who their fathers are. We have same sex marriage and abortions for people who are so irresponsible with their reproductive function that they cause pregnancies when they didn't want children.
Our civilization is self destructing before our eyes.
Liberals are the vowed enemy of civilization itself.
- Anonymous7 years ago
apparently if you are of the age of consent and agree to it anything goes now
- ?Lv 77 years ago
I mean totally. Marriage for people of legitimate sexual orientations is the same as letting men marry donkeys. It's ludicrous!! I mean, we allowed heterosexual marriage for so long but that didn't open the flood gates because a book about a talking snake said it was cool.
- Anonymous7 years ago
The Primates are jumping for Joy.
Source(s): "YO YO YO HO"