Thread: Gay Marriage, Legally Speaking…Part I

Gay Marriage, Legally Speaking…Part I

Posted by Patti Thornhill on Dec 3, 2013

With Illinois becoming the latest state to legalize gay marriage, I’d like to take a minute to explain how the law actually applies to this whole gay marriage thing. Interestingly, it has nothing to do with religion; we are strictly talking United States statutory and common law here.

Follow Joe For America on Facebook!

First of all, I think it bears asking: since why is the government involved with licensing private relationships after all? In the United States there were two basic reasons that the state started marriage licensing. First, it was started as a device to keep different races from marrying each other. Thus, it was a mechanism of state control over private behavior. An unlicensed marriage was considered “illegal.” Licensing gave the government jurisdiction over marriages. Thereafter, the states decided to require licenses for all marriage, since it was by then well known that this was a new source of revenue for the state.

Since marriage is licensed, it has a legal status that is recognized through the mechanism of the state. It is in the same category as business licenses, driver’s licenses and professional licenses. The very fact that marriage is a licensed status means that it is not an inherent right — if it were an inalienable right, there would be no need for licensing. For example, one needs a license to practice certain trades, but one does not need a license to practice one’s religion. The first is a privilege bestowed by a state mechanism and the latter is an inherent right.

Black’s Law Dictionary defines “license” as, “[t]he permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission…would be illegal.” The authority to license implies the power to prohibit.

When courts declare that homosexual marriage is a right, they are making declarations that are contrary to historical law and the Constitution. They are also establishing a very dangerous precedent on many levels, including one that could be detrimental to the very people who seek the state’s recognition of their gay union.

When jurists declare that homosexual marriage is legal because it is a civil right, not only could they not be more incorrect, but they are opening a Pandora’s box that can lead down a “slippery slope” that many advocates of gay marriage might not be aware of and certainly of which they would not support.

There is also an issue regarding the Full Faith and Credit clause. That clause states that contracts (licenses) that are valid in one state have to be considered lawful in all states. If the states want to make gay marriage legal, the appropriate legal path would have been to amend the Constitution to create an exception to the Full Faith and Credit clause to allow gay marriage to be decided on in a state-by-state fashion. However, the clause has been ignored, resulting in a patchwork system of statuses that are legal in some states and not legal in others. What ensues from this sort of legal application is chaos at any level where marital status is at issue. This was never the Framer’s intent.

The fact is, because of the way our common law system works, once gay marriage is ruled a “civil right,” then all unions between adults will have to be regarded as a civil right as well. You simply cannot say that gay marriage is a civil right without regarding other adult unions as such as well. Thus, once the precedent is established, the next adult union that will also have to be recognized by the state with a license will be polygamous marriage. There will be no way to stop it because competent adults cannot be allowed to marry someone of the same sex while disallowing multiple competent adults of any combination the right to do the same thing. Incestuous marriages will likely follow, although the state might be able to prevent this on the basis of an overriding concern with the genetic effects on offspring of such a union.

Most Americans don’t care what consenting adults do when they are alone, but they feel nevertheless that something regarding the gay marriage issue is just not right. They just can’t put their finger on it.

Stay tuned for Part II – The Law of Gay Marriage and the “Slippery Slope.”



Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2013/12/gay...Toz2RXKoJq6.99

Legitimizing Polyamory Is The Next Battle In the War On Traditional Marriage

Posted by Janna Brock

photo: theslowlane

Legalizing homosexual marriage was the gateway drug to the annihilation of traditional marriage. Since it was successful, the time has come for the turf war to expand to other deviant “relationships.” Polyamory is the next on the list. Polyamory is defined as an open marriage, with people “bedding down multiple partners.” In other words, it is married people having as many sexual partners are they so desire, opposite sex or same-sex. Why shouldn’t this unnatural relationship be given legitimacy now that homosexual “marriage” is legal in many states? Once homosexual marriage was legalized it opened the floodgate. There is no legitimate reason why these outrageous relationships shouldn’t be deemed acceptable in society. The only relationship that will be deemed unacceptable is traditional marriage.

The dam has burst. Traditional marriage is now culturally insignificant. With homosexual “marriage” made legal in many states, the time has come for the most bizarre relationships to be given equality.

On Monday, ABC News decided to publicize a movement known as polyamory. Co-anchor Dan Harris said, “Just for a minute, let’s do a thought experiment. Let’s set aside all of the emotion and consider whether the evangelists for open marriage might have a point.”
Later, he added, “More couples opting to become triples or fourples. Live-in lovers spicing up the marital bed, even helping raise the children.”

This is disgusting. The idea of multiple people sharing the martial bed, helping to raise each others children is more than disturbing. But in modern-day America, this lifestyle is becoming accepted. Polygamy is the being married to more than one person. It is illegal in the United States. But polyamory is about one couple bringing in multiple lovers into their homes. The ABC news profile didn’t make it seem bizarre. In fact, the report made it appear that this “arrangement” is becoming more common than ever before.

Michael has been happily married to Kamala Devi for 12 years, and the two share their California home with Michael’s live-in girlfriend, Rachel.
The trio, Michael, 49, Kamala Devi, 38, and Rachel, 27, live what’s called a “polyamorous” lifestyle. Rachel moved into Michael and Kamala Devi’s home six months ago. Kamala Devi said she allowed Rachel into their lives because “I saw Michael lit up and I saw him happy.” Monogamy is just not for them, she said.
The three are into meditation, yoga and Tantra sex.
“We have a lot of sex and a lot of sex partners over the years,” Michael said.

Polyamory is glorified hedonism. It is engaging every sexual desire a person could have, without restraints. It is above all selfish. The arrangement is all about sex.
But it’s not just sex, but perverted sexual pleasure. These kinds of relationships have always existed on the fringes of society. But with the legalizing of homosexual “marriage,” polyamory shouldn’t be left out. Now all deviant sexual relationships can come to the forefront. What was once unfathomable is the new normal.

”We share life together,” Kamala Devi said. “It takes a village to raise a child and it feels really good to have that kind of support.”
This kind of “polyamorous” relationship is becoming increasingly common, experts say.
“The divorce rate in the United States is over 50 percent. … People are not staying nearly as faithful they used to,” said Dr. Karen Stewart, a sex therapist in Los Angeles. “The world has become a much smaller place. We can seek out connections, there’s dating sites on every street corner. You can go anywhere to meet someone now.”

What this ABC news report is saying is that polyamory is the new answer to an increased divorce rate. So to combat divorce, spouses can see other lovers. It is acknowledging that people are not staying faithful to their spouses, and that this is okay. Polyamory is an arrangement where people can live in absolute freedom but still stay “married.”
What more can be expected from a culture that has abandoned traditional marriage? Polyamory is being portrayed as an arrangement built on “love” and “commitment.” Despite the numerous sexual partners, male or female.

“Polyamory is not about being swingers,” Stewart said. “It’s not about the one-off weekend with the couple we met at the bar. It’s not about that. It’s about forming long and lasting and loving relationships.”
When asked if Devin, Michael and Kamala Devi’s young son, understood their living arrangement with Rachel, Michael said, “He understands the word ‘polyamory.’ He understands what that means. He doesn’t really know what sex is yet.”

Polyamory is complete depravity. For a culture that has deemed homosexual marriage acceptable, it is not surprising that relationships once completely unthinkable would become legitimized. This is 2013 America, and the war against traditional marriage is happening on all fronts. At the heart of it is a war on Christianity, and the Judeo-Christian values that this country was founded upon. The assault on traditional marriage just took another twisted turn.
Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter.

http://dcclothesline.com/2013/12/03/...onal-marriage/