Polygamists Want In On Marriage Rights

The sacred institution of marriage is no stranger to adversity. The marriage between a man and a woman has been under heavy attack for decades now.

The liberal bullying to make the LGBT community a legally recognized entity has created political ripples. We are beginning to see the many repercussions of their efforts today.

One such repercussion is blurring the perimeters of what members of a marriage unit are able to be; and how many members of the unit there are.

Taking marriage out of its constitutional intention opens up the institution to parody marriages that mock the design of our species.

TheClarion-Ledger reported:

Self-identified polygamists have filed a federal lawsuit in the state seeking to prevent gay marriages, saying it doesn’t pass the constitutional Lemon Test of prohibition on government favoring one religious view over another.”

The lawsuit was filed in Mississippi, against Pontotoc Circuit Clerk Melinda Nowicki, Attorney General Jim Hood and Gov. Phil Bryant.

The case looked at the legal definition of marriage, and the types of marriages states are legally able to recognize.

TheClarion-Ledger reported on the plaintiffs’defense claims of character and motive:

The plaintiffs are not bigots for respectfully asking that this court uphold the Constitution. This case is not based on emotion but on what the Constitution allows. This is a war for the viability of our Constitutional Republic itself.”

Among the plaintiffs’ are polygamists and a machinist; one who wants to marry a machine, such as a computer.

Both of these classes of individuals see that if you legalize gay marriage, there is no reason to stop the madness there.

Lifesite News reported on the argument held by the polygamist:

Chris Sevier and others filed a federal lawsuit reasoning that same-sex “marriage” is part of the religion of secular humanism, and since it is of a religious nature, the state has no right to recognize it over other faith-based “marriages” such as polygamy, zoophilia, and machinism.”

Secular humanism holds the worldview that human beings are capable of morality and fulfillment apart from God.

It is ironic that people who would claim secular humanism would display such immoral actions.

Humanism also claims to do what is best for man. How can that be done when you choose a life of homosexuality which doesn’t keep man’s species alive, a primitive instinct in human nature.

Sevier, and party, appeal to the Establishment Clause, saying the Constitution bars the government from favoring one religion over another.

The Establishment Clause states,

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The lawsuit would be ruled in favor of the outlandish “marriage” definitions if we took legislative history as a case of predictive outcome.

Under Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, an individual couldn’t be denied the right to marry, as an inherent liberty, according to the lawsuit.

This case comes at a time where senses are heightened for the LGBT community in Mississippi. Only a short while ago, a bill was passed that threatened their feelings of acceptance.

HB 1523 was a bill that gave those of religious beliefs the right to not be forced to accept in their business practices sexual orientations that contradicted their faith.

Jackson Free Press reported:

The bill defines the sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction protected in the act with three parts: marriage should be recognized as a union of one man and one woman; sexual relations are reserved for such a marriage; and “male” or “female” refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as determined by anatomy at birth.”

Judge Reeves squashed the bill the night before it was supposed to be put into action.

Currently, on the national level, you can deny service in your business establishment to anyone, except on the basis of skin color, race, religion, sex, nationality, or any physical conditions a customer can’t prevent.

Federally, oppressive discrimination laws have not yet seeped into the private business owners doors. Unfortunately, on a state level, individuals can be forced to provide their services to those they are religiously conflicted with.

There are 19 states that have added discrimination laws to protect those of the LGBT community from feeling rejected.

Where does the line get drawn with regards to what constitutes a marriage, when people make decisions off the seat of their emotions?

Every time a member of the LGBT community is not allowed to do whatever they want, they run into the open arms of a left-wing representative, to get them to twist legislation until it appeals to their whims.

The Constitution has to be held to a higher standard. It’s notthere to manipulate and mold. It is there to protect the American people, often from themselves.

Let us know what you think of the lawsuit and whether it is constitutional in the comment section.

And to stay current on the latest Mommy Underground stories, follow us on Facebook and be sure to like and share our posts!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *