It only took five days after the Supreme Court created a constitutional right to homosexual “marriage” for a Montana man to file for a license to marry his second wife.
This is not a divorce case. He’s still married to the first wife, but he’s looking to start a collection.
Nathan Collier of Billings said he was inspired by Friday’s ruling.
That would be the same ruling that the Left had promised could never lead to polygamous marriages.
Yellowstone County Courthouse officials initially declined to give Collier the license, but then he said he would sue if they didn’t. The officials said they would consult the county attorney and get back to Collier.
If the attorney refers to the Supreme Court’s recent decision, he won’t find any help in the majority’s opinion, as the exact same specious arguments that led to homosexual marriage can be used to defend polygamous marriage.
In fact, if homosexual marriage is a constitutional right, that means real marriage is also a right, so it’s possible that polygamous marriage is a “triple right” under the doublethink of the Left.
After all, the groom has a right to marry his bride, and the bride has the right to marry her bride, and that bride has a right to marry her groom, so it all works out, a perfect isosceles triangle of sin. If marrying someone of either gender is a constitutional right, then surely the limit on the number of people married at one time is purely arbitrary.
It’s already happened in Thailand, where three men married each other in February.
Gosh, it seems like only yesterday that Politico assured us that polygamy could never happen. Actually, it was the day before yesterday, June 30, in an article reassuringly titled “No, Polygamy Isn’t the Next Gay Marriage: Group marriage is the past — not the future — of matrimony” by Jonathan Rauch, who actually cited Sesame Street in his first paragraph.
In case you’ve missed the news in the days since Friday’s ruling that Justice Kennedy assured us would not endanger Christians’ rights or lead to other, weirder variations on “marriage,” the U.S. military is being urged by gay activists to purge Bible-believing chaplains, and the ACLU has promised it will no longer defend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act but it will defend gay “marriage” in court.
So far, this is all preliminary to the really big persecution that is rumbling down the tracks, the one where President Obama is going to use his office, and states will use their official powers, to force “bitter clingers” to change their beliefs. Be prepared for a flood of Christian and Jewish wedding businesses being fined, shut down or seeing their owners jailed.
Expect a big push to eliminate tax exempt status for churches that don’t toe the homosexual line and support gay “marriage.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if there aren’t federal takeovers of some churches that just don’t bend to the new rules.
Don’t listen to any of the claptrap about gay “marriage” being about “equality” — it never was anything of the sort. It’s always been about creating an opportunity to punish the faithful who adhere to God’s word in the Bible and install a new, anti-Christian nation.