The leader of the Green Party of England and Wales said she’s open to considering polygamous marriages.
Marriage has been redefined to the point that it doesn’t really mean anything anymore. If two guys want to get married, they should be able to. Their “marital” status doesn’t have any effect on anyone else, so no one else should care. If you don’t like gay marriage, then don’t marry someone of the same sex.
They say it doesn’t have any effect on anyone else. Yeah, tell that to the businesses that have had to pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines to the point of bankruptcy all because they didn’t openly endorse the idea of homosexual marriage.
If two guys or two girls can get married, then why not three guys or three girls? That cultural shift is coming. The cultural shock of gay marriage will soon wear off, and our society will be hungry for another shocker. Homosexual polygamous marriages are next. Incestuous marriages will soon be accepted, followed by bestial marriages and whatever else you can imagine. I mean, we wouldn’t want to discriminate against them. Breitbart reported:
Speaking in a Q&A session with PinkNews readers, the Green leader responded to a question from Redfern Jon Barrett, who asked: “As someone living with his two boyfriends in a stable long-term relationship, I would like to know what your stance is on polyamory rights. Is there room for Green support on group civil partnerships or marriages?”
Bennett responded: “We have led the way on many issues related to the liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships, and we are open to further conversation and consultation.”
One of the leading criticisms leveled by opponents of gay marriage was that it could create a “slippery slope” that would lead to marriage being redefined in other ways, including allowing more than two people to enter into a union.
At the time the bill creating gay marriage was going through the House of Commons, Conservative MP Matthew Offord asked: “Why is the government saying there should be same sex marriages? Why should it not also be blood relatives? Why should it not also be polygamists? It seems they are rushing this forward and they have not thought out what the consequences are going to be.”
His colleague Craig Whittaker also said: “What will our successors be discussing and have to legislate for in the future? Polygamy? Three-way relationships? Who knows what else?”
It’s already happening. The only thing that we’re waiting on is for governments to openly and officially recognize these relationships as marriages. It’ll happen, just as it’s happening with same-sex marriage.
We reported recently about a male threesome marrying in Thailand. When you decide that there is no moral standard except your own personal preferences, anything goes. Two homosexuals? Why not? Why not three? Or four? Maybe they could throw in a horse or two as well. If that’s what they were in to.
Not long ago, we reported about a father and daughter who got married in New Jersey. There was also a case where an Italian court overturned a 60-year-old pedophile’s conviction, because he and his 11-year-old “acquaintance” were in love. Liberals shied away from these stories, but there’s no reason to be repulsed by them if there’s no standard of morality. “Love is love, after all,” as one member of that Thai threesome said.
We’ve been on a slippery slope for the past 50 years. Liberals want to deny it, as is their wont. Just expect these things to get progressively worse in the near future. All they need is the media to convince people that perversion is beautiful and natural and that God’s moral framework is ugly and bigoted, and everybody will fall for it. They already have.