If I Had All The Time in the World

[elfs]

If I had all the time in the world, this is what I'd respond to:

WorldNet Daily tells us that there's an epidemic of young, lovely teachers seducing their students. In most cases, it's a woman seducing a boy, but there's one case of "I thought I wrote that story," where the headline reads "Twin lesbian teachers seduce high school student."

Showing a tragic and terrible misunderstanding of everyone's sexuality but her own, Jan LaRue over at Concerned Women For America asserts that the country is doomed to a court upholding polygamy someday because straight men, even when married, can't keep their eyes off other women and it's natural for them to adopt a harem. No, okay, she didn't really say that. What she did saywas that the court would uphold polygamy someday because bisexuals, even when married, can't keep their eyes off the sex they "don't have" and so it's natural for them to be polyamorous.

The Democrats have said, "Thank you very much, bloggers and other people of the Internet, but you're all criminals so to Hell with you." They've put the House Intellectual Property Committee in the trust of a man who wants to destroy the Internet and replace it with a gated, licensed, subscription-based service. Charming.

And you have to wonder if Bush is secretly Palpitane. It has long been a matter of record that loyalty in the Bush clan goes one way: they've got the power, so you're loyal to them. They don't have to be loyal to you. Apparently this message has filted down to the rank and file: the Dems were about two give two month's severance to Republican staffers about to lose their jobs, but the Republicans nixed the idea on the grounds that they didn't have time to study the proposal.

Whatever.

Comments

[srmalloy.livejournal.com]

Society already accepts that a person can find someone they can love deeply after they've left a previous marriage (divorce or death); despite people avoiding thinking about it, it's still polygamy, albeit serial polygamy. But I can't see why this other person that you might come to love deeply has to be restricted to showing up only after an existing relationship has ended. Whether three or more people can make a joint relationship work is a completely separate question, and with more people, the relationship inherently gets much more complicated. But if they can make it work, I don't see what makes parallel polygamy unacceptable while serial polygamy is acceptable.

But, then, I enjoy asking someone ranting against gay marriage whether they're married or not, and if they are, getting them to confirm that they hold marriage to be a deep, spiritual bond blessed by God... and then asking them how, if there were two men or two women who, in some town across the country, were allowed to make purely civil declarations in front of a justice of the peace that gave them the same civil rights and responsibilities as a husband and wife, exactly what horrible degradation that would cause to the spiritual bond between them and their wife/husband...