Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
- Thread starter
- #301
It's true. Obergefell is null and void because of New York vs Ferber (1982 USSC). That case found that adults cannot exercise any civil right to the detriment, mental or physical, of a child. "Gay marriage" uses a contract to permanently divorce a child from either a mother or father for life. There are numerous studies that show this is harmful to a child. And where single parents do deprive a child of the opposite parent, it isn't written in a contract and hope still exists. The contractual part of this harm to children is the crux of it. The Infants Doctrine says that no contract may exist that has as any of its terms a bind that harms a child physically or mentally. The Doctrine goes further to say that if such a contract DOES exist, has been created, or even upheld as is the case with Obergefell, that contract is null and void upon its face, without any legal challenge. In other words, the Infants Doctrine overrules the USSC. It even overrules the US Constitution; which is the same as saying it overrules the US Supreme Court, should they find in opposition to the Doctrine. New York vs Ferber establishes it. This is why Obergefell is an illegal Ruling. That and for a half dozen other equally weighty reasons.
It is that last bit where the state of Alabama's Judge Moore will prevail if he is clever enough. But that's the topic of another thread.
All that being said, as long as the USSC is (erroneously) considering Obergefell "legal and binding", they'll be backed to a wall with their own words. And this is the delight I'm taking in watching all this unfold, as I simultaneously am opposed to polygamy marriage as equally as I am opposed to "gay marriage". It's fun watching fascist Justices be bound by their own words into shame and retraction. It's pleasurable watching judicial arrogance be dethroned in less than 2 years.
So I write this thread encouraging the Browns to weave in their sexual orientation into their religious and privacy pleadings so that the Court will clip its own wings of hubris. And in that, I take great pleasure.
Yes, and you might want to read this for details: Judge Roy Moore of Alabama Can Win If He Does This: Argues For Alabama's Children
It is that last bit where the state of Alabama's Judge Moore will prevail if he is clever enough. But that's the topic of another thread.
All that being said, as long as the USSC is (erroneously) considering Obergefell "legal and binding", they'll be backed to a wall with their own words. And this is the delight I'm taking in watching all this unfold, as I simultaneously am opposed to polygamy marriage as equally as I am opposed to "gay marriage". It's fun watching fascist Justices be bound by their own words into shame and retraction. It's pleasurable watching judicial arrogance be dethroned in less than 2 years.
So I write this thread encouraging the Browns to weave in their sexual orientation into their religious and privacy pleadings so that the Court will clip its own wings of hubris. And in that, I take great pleasure.
Oh, good lord. Now the Infancy Doctrine overrides the US Constitution.
.
Yes, and you might want to read this for details: Judge Roy Moore of Alabama Can Win If He Does This: Argues For Alabama's Children