Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Ohioan
Since marriages have always been subject to annulment if never consummated by a procreational act (that is a normal sexual act), there are various ways that States can fight back against the Supreme Court ruling, forcing additional litigation of the ultimate issue.

And they should. Force the definition of the word "consummation" to be litigated all the way back up to the Supreme Court. Make them define "consummation" as poop pushing. Make them deal with dirty things in a way they can't hide. Put the shame back on them.

This approach would have an obvious intent, of course. But it would still focus attention on the actual circumstances of a case, rather than the simple word game around the meaningless term (when you are actually dealing with biology) of "equality." (All couples are not equally suited to the mating process, as understood throughout human history.)

They would simply hold their "ceremonies" outside the reach of people who could object on those grounds. I also do not think such objections are recognized as a matter of state law.

11 posted on 09/09/2015 8:47:12 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp
"do not think such objections are recognized as a matter of state law."

Not now, they are not. That was the whole point of my suggestion. Pass a law that establishes an ombudsman, with authority to protect against marriages permanently in question & subject to annulment.

14 posted on 09/09/2015 8:59:11 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson