The Destruction of Marriage

By Joe Messina, Special for USDR

I read a story last week about a couple… I mean a “trouple,” that recently got “married.” Now, I know there will be a few of you jumping all over my stuff because you think I am coming down on this because they are three lesbians! Their sexual orientation has nothing to do with this. It has to do with many like me saying that the way the fight came down about same sex-marriage, the catch phrases and alike would demean and trample all over the institution of marriage. It has!

Recently, in Massachusetts, three lesbian women decided they wanted to be married to each other. Yes, THREE PEOPLE wanted to enter into marriage together. Why? Because they love each other.

One woman admitted after several failed male relationships she just couldn’t see herself being monogamous. So what happens when she decides she is tired of or falls out of love with wife A, but is really into wife B and John’s wife next door is not looking so bad either? We will deal with that later.

How do they live in the same house? And please don’t give me that garbage that they will make it work! Can you imagine the atmosphere in that home after the breakup? They’re talking about having three kids so each can have one. What?! Sure, that’s why my ex-wife and I had 4 children (2 girls, 2boys) so we could each have one child of different genders when we split up. That’s just RIDICULOUS!

You see, some of us were screaming that the argument about same-sex marriage wasn’t that we wanted to tell you “who to love.” By simply making marriage a legal contract between people who love each opened it up to all kinds of issues… as we see in Massachusetts.

So again I ask, what next? One man and two women? Three men and two women? Six women and one man? The possibilities are endless! CAN YOU IMAGINE VISITATION SCHEDULES? How do you split up the kids? How do you split up the assets? We do enough damage to our kids under normal divorce proceedings. Can you imagine these kinds of unions ending any better?

Marriage was never meant to be like this. It was always meant to be between two people, and according to my faith one man and one woman. Why? You’ll have to wait for another column for the answer on that. Today, I want to deal with the destruction of marriage.

Shortly after the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) tossed out the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA, signed into law by Bill Clinton, how easily Dems forget these things) Justice Anthony Scalia warned his colleagues of the potential for this kind of foolishness in his dissent in United States v. Windsor. He went on to say, “By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition.”

According to the Washington Times, Justice Scalia also predicted (in the 2003 majority decision in Lawrence v. Texas) that striking down a law making sodomy illegal, would become the battering ram to eliminate prohibitions on bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, bestiality, and obscenity, among other things. I don’t want to deal with any of that other behavior, just yet. Simply, what is Marriage anymore?

Can a young girl dream of her prince charming or will that be abnormal? Should she dream of her Princess Charming (is that PC?) To be real “normal,” should she leave the possibilities open to a Prince Charming, Princess Charming, two handmaidens, and one court jester?

Foolishness. It’s just foolishness! The attitude of a spoiled and mixed up generation that says if I can have it my way, you can’t have it yours. Society then folds under the PC pressure because it doesn’t want the minority to feel bad (in this case minority means the three people who want to get married.)

In an interview in Sydney Australia, self-proclaimed Lesbian activist, Masha Gessen stated same-sex marriage is “a lie. Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there. It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” HOLD THAT THOUGHT WE ARE NOT DONE YET!  She went on to say that she has “three children with five parents,” (I can’t get that to add up on all my fingers and toes.) She said, “I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally.”

Can you spell confusion boys and girls? This creates an environment where these kids are growing up in houses with several parents and several kids from the different parents and when the split comes, as it will (because one of the “parents” is no longer in love with parent 4 and loves all the others but can’t stand to see parent 4 touching child 7 and parent 3) what child goes with what parent? And when the 4 “loving-consenting” adults left decide they need to replace the one that left the “clan” who decides who that is? How do they find them? Why do we have to screw up our children because of selfish indulgences?

Taking a direction that marriage is undefined is dangerous. There are very few things (if any) in life as important as marriage that are “undefined.”

Look, if you want to have a 3-way, 5-way, 7-way relationship and live together in your “commune” or whatever you call it do it, go to a lawyer, draw up the papers, and make it a legal union of some kind. Call out all the “what-if’s” that need to be considered.

Just don’t drag the rest of us in trying to call it “marriage” and cluttering up courts and spending tax dollars because you had a 60’s drug flashback and started confusing love and sex again.America wake up or you’re going to lose your country.

All opinions expressed on USDR are those of the author and not necessarily those of US Daily Review.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.