The flood gate is slowly creaking open - or least it should open.

Says Fredrik Deboer. Deboer suggests that polygamy should be next on the table, in all seriousness, since same-sex mirage was mad law of the land over at Politico.

The article was brought to my attention as I quickly skimmed topics over at CAF. Within the thread I found this comment.

 SofiaS writes:

You DO realise that the Bible is a lot more supportive of polygamy than of same sex marriage? Right?

You also DO realise that no one wants to stop you being Catholic. They just want to stop you stopping them from marrying the person they love in a legally recognised ceremony.

I've commented and documented the anger that resides in people like SofiaS here and here.

Posters like SofiaS come in two forms in terms of their posting habits. First form is the consistent poster. The consistent poster's post count lines up with his join date. He expresses his criticism in a somewhat reasonable way. The second form is "I'm only here for the food" poster. This poster just stops by to comment on topics that irate him. Out of the two forms SofiaS is the latter. Sofia's join date of CAF is dated June 2014; since then she has only posted eleven times as of June 28, 2015 at 3:06 pm. Like Mr. Fatalism, who posted at What's Wrong With the World, the second form tend to posts very confrontational if not snarky posts. Within these confrontations the second form also tell believers the history of their faith that they do not share nor believe in.

"I've studied your book."
"No, you haven't. You just read it."

What both the first and second form have in common is there appeal to scripture to play the devil's advocate. The profile of either form may fall under a liberal theist or pantheist, but most common is as a secularist (atheist/humanist); both forms are rather foreign to the philosophy present in a given site/forum, though there's at least one of them that accomplishes saying that Christians aren't allowed to eat shell fish (at least one) when it comes to topics critical of same-sex romance and acts. The second form mostly concentrates on gender & sexual identity, and the LGBT "community" or any other marriage form outside of one-man-one-woman. Rarely do each show up on topics about family or aspects of the mass. The second form is always absent on matters of immigration and usury. That stuff is way out of their bounds.