|The end result of allowing gay marriage, according to Vox (and all other irrational cranks)|
And now that the one
man, one womandefinition has been arbitrarily struck down on nonsensical grounds, there can be absolutely no question that the oneman, onewoman part will be challenged and struck down as well. All of the homogamy supporters who claim otherwise are already wrong, as anyone who happens to have read a pro-polygamy press release will know. That's a done deal. It's a bit more of a stretch to be able to tell if people will also be able to marry animals due to the presumed consent issues, but you can bet that some horse-loving freakshow is going to try. It's legal in New Zealand, you know.
Witness, one and all, the characteristic outburst of a crank: Declaring that a law is unconstitutional on the grounds that it consists of an irrational and prejudiced infringement upon people’s rights is “nonsensical”; and also, allowing gays to marry = slippery slope to polygamy and bestiality. (Because those are teh bad, donchya know.) As if we hadn’t all heard that before. Poor Vox, he can’t even be original about it anymore. (Too bad he forgot to include marrying children, too, just to make the crankery go full circle … oh, wait, the very first comment does it for him. Never mind.)