“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Eventually The Word "Marriage" Will Mean Nothing

Many argued that when Texas' anti-sodomy laws were overturned, there was no need to worry about the proverbial "slippery slope." Depending on the outcome, here's a case in a foreign court which the Supreme Court could consider and cite sometime in the not too distant future:
From Duetsche Welle:

German Incest Convict to Take Case to Highest Court

The lawyer representing a Saxon couple found guilty of incest said the siblings will take their case to Germany's Constitutional Court. It's the final step in a long and contentious legal battle.

Attorney Endrik Wilhelm said the siblings, Patrick S. and Susan K., would be filing their historic appeal after a district court in Dresden refused to override a jail sentence Patrick faces. The case, Wilhelm told the daily Dresdner Neueste Nachrichten newspaper, would be to challenge the constitutionality of paragraph 173 of the German Criminal Code, which outlaws sexual relations between close relatives.

The siblings have been in and out of the courts for the past five years. In 2002 Patrick S. was given a suspended sentence of one year in prison for sleeping with his sister. In 2004 he served 10 months in jail for violating the terms of the original conviction, and in 2005 he was sentenced to two-and-a-half years incarceration for incest.

Susan K. never received any jail time since she was always tried as an adolescent. The siblings have four children -- Susan K. has a fifth child from a different father.

The sentence Patrick S. currently faces contains no possibility of parole.

Unusual Family History

Patrick S. and Susan K. are immediate relatives, but they did not grow up as brother and sister. Patrick was adopted and raised by a family in Potsdam, while Susan spent her childhood with their mutual mother in Leipzig.

The two met in May 2000, after Patrick decided to contact his biological family. Their first child was born a year later.

Anti-incest laws have been taken off the books in a number of countries including France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, Turkey, Japan, Argentina and Brazil.

Now the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe will be asked to decide if Germany should follow those nations' lead or if it can retain its current legislation.


Today, the issue is whether Germany can say that incest is illegal. Soon, the arguments will be made that if incest is no longer illegal, how can society say that a brother and sister (or any combination of individuals) cannot be married.

The traditional definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman is being rewritten with New Jersey being the latest state to implement "Civil Unions". But, how can marriage or civil unions be limited to two "individuals"? Who can tell Patrick S. and Susan K. that their love is not as real or as valid as anyone else's? Who will be so bigoted and heartless?

The die is cast and it's only a matter of time before the word marriage will be made archaic in the West. It will be redefined until it no longer has meaning and eventually governments will no longer recognize "marriage" at all.

17 comments:

  1. The bed rock foundation of every functional and survivable human society is based upon the family union of a man and a woman, the children they produce, the survival of the tribe they are part of, and the evolution to civilization and posterity.

    The marriage of a man and a woman are opposite sides to the helix of humanity. All other human relationships are subordinate, no matter what name you attach to it. It is so fundamental it never had to be distinguished until this era, no more than you had to explain to someone that they had to breathe.

    Civil rights are one thing, protection under the law another, but sanction of an absurd proposition and the numbing of common sense is an indication of a collapse in rational thought, understanding and human history.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Whit said, The die is cast and it's only a matter of time before the word marriage will be made archaic in the West. It will be redefined until it no longer has meaning and eventually governments will no longer recognize
    "marriage" at all.


    When two people get married, it means a lot to each other, and they ought not really give a crap if the government recognizes it or not. So long as the Church recognizes it, or their clan recognizes it, they should attach less importance to the words, "By the power invested in me by the State of New Jersey I pronounce you man and wife" and more importance to the words "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

    ReplyDelete
  3. And Whit, too - I didn't see your byline down there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. T,

    God never put two women together.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Aha

    Figure that the logic of PC demands decriminalization of every single crime that can concievably be deemed "victimless".

    Given the emphasis on the rights of the child (over parents), abandonment of any traditional moral structure, and polymorphous perversity I think we will see sometime soon a see a PC push to decriminalize pedophilia down to age 13.

    Figure also that decriminalization of every possible kind of drug is somewhere on the agenda as well. This has halfway happened in Holland.

    In place of such laws, instead there will be thought crimes masquerading as hate speech and antidiscrimination laws. It will not be legal to even question the wisdom of immigration policy or amorality of legislation, since that may be construed as hatefull or discriminatory. This is already happening in Great Britain.

    In a rare display of good sense just over a year ago the Latvian parliament succeeded in pushing through a constitutional amendment defining marriage the traditional way, precisely in order to forestall this nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  6. FP said:
    Given the emphasis on the rights of the child (over parents), abandonment of any traditional moral structure, and polymorphous perversity I think we will see sometime soon a see a PC push to decriminalize pedophilia down to age 13.

    Homosexuals in Great Britain tried that a few years ago and were narrowly defeated in Parliament.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It seems that the countries that had to endure the communist boot have a much cleared vision on the sometimes tenuous ropes that sustain society.

    Thank you our esteemed Latvian friend.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fellow peacekeeper said Given the emphasis on the rights of the child (over parents), abandonment of any traditional moral structure, and polymorphous perversity I think we will see sometime soon a see a PC push to decriminalize pedophilia down to age 13.

    The forbidden fruit syndrome will kick in, and Congressmen want to go camping with 12 year old pages.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So, are we all just going to go along with this bullshit? Just say oh well and shrug our shoulders? Just go back to reading blogs, thoughtful essays and writing our own posts?
    Is that all we can do?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'd put the form of sex, matrimony etc. quit far down the list as far as a culture's viability goes. Our Ozzie and Harriet hasn't been around for long. In the deep well of the past it seems almost an anomaly. There are too many other factors, particularily nowadays. It wasn't mom and dad that put the English on top for awhile, but industrialism and the stock company. And mom and dad didn't bring them down either. Polygamy seems to have served some groups well enough, and the hunting tribes go back a long ways, and they weren't entirely monogamous. There are a lot of factors involved.

    Just rented "On The Beach' that old apocalyptic movie from 1959. If these nuclear weapons keep spreading the end of the worlders may well get what they seem to be hoping for, the nitwits.

    ReplyDelete
  11. When Jesus put--if those are his words--the stricture against divorce, he was well intended, thinking of the woman's welfare, most likely, things being tough for divorced women in those times and circumstances.

    One of the best rules ever adopted out here in Idaho was the no- fault divorce rule. It cut down on the number of 'Idaho County divorces'.

    There is a magistrates judge here who used to frequent a watering hole here. You still have to give a reason here in Idaho for getting a divorce, but it can be anything. Really anything. He told this story about asking a plaintiff in court one day--"What is the reason you are seeking this divorce?"

    Answer came back from this (liberated?) woman--"His cum don't taste right, Your Honour"

    Well, it is a bar, and the story is true. Gave us all a big belly laugh. And the divorce went through, as it should have.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The divorce was tastefully done, you might say.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Bobalharb, your asides and your insights are always a surprise. Evertime I see your posts, I think of some of my favorite pieces from Mozart or Bach where I discover another level on every hearing.

    Keep posting so that we can keep enjoying the reading. Keeping on keeping on.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hello!!! 2164th.blogspot.com is one of the most excellent resourceful websites of its kind. I take advantage of reading it every day. Keep it that way.

    ReplyDelete