Posted on 11/27/2015 7:33:10 PM PST by Salman
Cleo Pablo married her longtime partner when gay weddings became legal in Arizona and looked forward to the day when her wife and their children could move into her home in the small Native American community outside Phoenix where she grew up.
That day never came. The Ak-Chin Indian Community doesn't recognize same-sex marriages and has a law that prohibits unmarried couples from living together. So Pablo voluntarily gave up her tribal home and now is suing the tribe in tribal court to have her marriage validated.
"I want equal opportunity," Pablo said. "I want what every married couple has."
Pablo's situation reflects an overlooked story line following the U.S. Supreme Court's historic decision this year that legalized gay marriages nationwide: American Indian reservations are not bound by the decision and many continue to forbid gay marriages and deny insurance and other benefits.
The reasons vary and to some extent depend on cultural recognition of gender identification and roles, and the influence of outside religions, legal experts say. Other issues like high unemployment, alcoholism and suicides on reservations also could be higher on the priority list, said Ann Tweedy, an associate professor at the Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, who has studied tribes' marriage laws.
Advocacy groups largely have stayed away from pushing tribes for change, recognizing that tribes have the inherent right to regulate domestic relations within their boundaries.
"Tribal sovereignty is very important to tribes," Tweedy said. "They don't want to just adopt what the U.S. does."
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Remember, Eisenhower always said his worst mistakes as President, were all on the Supreme Court.
Well, let’s hear it for the ‘injuns’. I suppose the libtards will get their panties all in a bunch trying to figure out how to respond to that without being ‘racist’.
Frick’n morons. Not the tribes, but the libtards, as if I even needed to clarify.
If she wants her "marriage" validated, she should have a real marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/gay-marriage-legal-not-tribal-lands-183233168.html
Regards,
B.S. lady, if you wanted that you'd have a husband in your married couple.
What you want is the same thing that was wanted of the other peoples: to ignore thousands of years of matrimonial and religious and social convention and do something twisted with legal protection.
Just 'cause something's legal doesn't make it right, either.
The tribes should be allowed to regulate marriage just like they did before the evil white man came.
They should be able to sell their women as slaves.
The chief should decide who they marry.
They should be able to marry them off at a very young age.
The men should be able to have as many wife’s as they can afford.
Then finally they should be able to kill them any time they want.
The women should do most of the hard physical labor.
Just like they did before the evil white man came.
/S/
No matter what, the tribes have the power to regulate activity on the lands under their jurisdiction.
But but but homofascists said that “native peoples” had a historic construct for same sex unions hundreds of years ago.
Society must change because of Marxist cultural revolution.
Smash the ‘state’, smash the ‘patriarchy’, smash the ‘church’.
Replace it with godless communism.
The family unit has been cast aside in the West and blame Feminazi Marxist for that. It was NOW’s goal.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3200158/posts
Marxist Feminism�s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett (sister of NOW’s founder)
During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?†She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!â€
What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,†we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me.
Sometime later, I was a young divorcee with a small child. At the urging of my sister, I relocated to NYC after spending years married to an American executive stationed in Southeast Asia. The marriage over, I was making a new life for my daughter and me. Katie said, “Come to New York. We’re making revolution! Some of us are starting the National Organization of Women and you can be part of it.â€
I hadn’t seen her for years. Although she had tormented me when we were youngsters, those memories were faint after my Asian traumas and the break-up of my marriage. I foolishly mistook her for sanctuary in a storm. With so much time and distance between us, I had forgotten her emotional instability.
And so began my period as an unwitting witness to history. I stayed with Kate and her lovable Japanese husband, Fumio, in a dilapidated loft on The Bowery as she finished her first book, a PhD thesis for Columbia University, “Sexual Politics.â€
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,†a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?†she asked.
“To make revolution,†they answered.
“What kind of revolution?†she replied.
“The Cultural Revolution,†they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?†she demanded.
“By destroying the American family!†they answered.
“How do we destroy the family?†she came back.
“By destroying the American Patriarch,†they cried exuberantly.
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?†she replied.
“By taking away his power!â€
“How do we do that?â€
“By destroying monogamy!†they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?â€
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!†they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’â€: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system.
It fell on my ears as a ludicrous scheme, as if they were a band of highly imaginative children planning a Brinks robbery; a lark trumped up on a snowy night amongst a group of spoiled brats over booze and hashish.
To me, this sounded silly. I was enduring culture shock after having been cut-off from my homeland, living in Third-World countries for years with not one trip back to the United States. I was one of those people who, upon returning to American soil, fell out of the plane blubbering with ecstasy at being home in the USA. I knelt on the ground covering it with kisses. I had learned just exactly how delicious was the land of my birth and didn’t care what anyone thought because they just hadn’t seen what I had or been where I had been. I had seen factory workers and sex-slaves chained to walls.
How could they know? Asia is beyond our ken and, as they say, utterly inscrutable, and a kind of hell I never intended to revisit. I lived there, not junketed, not visited like sweet little tourists — I’d conducted households and tried to raise a child. I had outgrown the communism of my university days and was clumsily groping my way back to God.
How could twelve American women who were the most respectable types imaginable — clean and privileged graduates of esteemed institutions: Columbia, Radcliffe, Smith, Wellesley, Vassar; the uncle of one was Secretary of War under Franklin Roosevelt — plot such a thing? Most had advanced degrees and appeared cogent, bright, reasonable and good. How did these people rationally believe they could succeed with such vicious grandiosity? And why?
I dismissed it as academic-lounge air-castle-building. I continued with my new life in New York while my sister became famous publishing her books, featured on the cover of “Time Magazine.†“Time†called her “the Karl Marx of the Women’s Movement.†This was because her book laid out a course in Marxism 101 for women. Her thesis: The family is a den of slavery with the man as the Bourgeoisie and the woman and children as the Proletariat. The only hope for women’s “liberation†(communism’s favorite word for leading minions into inextricable slavery; “liberation,†and much like “collective†– please run from it, run for your life) was this new “Women’s Movement.†Her books captivated the academic classes and soon “Women’s Studies†courses were installed in colleges in a steady wave across the nation with Kate Millett books as required reading.
Imagine this: a girl of seventeen or eighteen at the kitchen table with Mom studying the syllabus for her first year of college and there’s a class called “Women’s Studies.†“Hmmm, this could be interesting,†says Mom. “Maybe you could get something out of this.â€
Seems innocuous to her. How could she suspect this is a class in which her innocent daughter will be taught that her father is a villain? Her mother is a fool who allowed a man to enslave her into barbaric practices like monogamy and family life and motherhood, which is a waste of her talents. She mustn’t follow in her mother’s footsteps. That would be submitting to life as a mindless drone for some domineering man, the oppressor, who has mesmerized her with tricks like romantic love. Never be lured into this chicanery, she will be taught. Although men are no damned good, she should use them for her own orgasmic gratification; sleep with as many men as possible in order to keep herself unattached and free. There’s hardly a seventeen-year-old girl without a grudge from high school against a Jimmy or Jason who broke her heart. Boys are learning, too, and they can be careless during high school, that torment of courting dances for both sexes.
By the time Women’s Studies professors finish with your daughter, she will be a shell of the innocent girl you knew, who’s soon convinced that although she should be flopping down with every boy she fancies, she should not, by any means, get pregnant. And so, as a practitioner of promiscuity, she becomes a wizard of prevention techniques, especially abortion.
The goal of Women’s Liberation is to wear each female down to losing all empathy for boys, men or babies. The tenderest aspects of her soul are roughened into a rock pile of cynicism, where she will think nothing of murdering her baby in the warm protective nest of her little-girl womb. She will be taught that she, in order to free herself, must become an outlaw. This is only reasonable because all Western law, since Magna Carta and even before, is a concoction of the evil white man whose true purpose is to press her into slavery.
Be an outlaw! Rebel! Be defiant! (Think Madonna, Lady Gaga, Lois Lerner, Elizabeth Warren.) “All women are prostitutes,†she will be told. You’re either really smart and use sex by being promiscuous for your own pleasures and development as a full free human being “just like men†or you can be a professional prostitute, a viable business for women, which is “empowering†or you can be duped like your mother and prostitute yourself to one man exclusively whereby you fall under the heavy thumb of “the oppressor.†All wives are just “one-man whores.â€...
Pic brings buffalo to mind.
——So the natives are not so PC. ——
some are queer and restless
“Warpath” you said “Warpath”...LOL! That’s a racist dogwhistle term against Native indigenous populations! /s
(i saw what you did there, even if by accident...funny!)
Notice how renaming the Washington Redskins is NOT a high priority among Native Americans.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1647824/posts
Some time ago I started a thread about your very point.
Looking back the OP I offered must’ve needed a fair number of addendum because I sure kept going back to add more.
Indeed. All it is is sodomitics and stealth adultery. If they inseminate themselves, the they pretty much are cheating. And proof is that courts are making the man pay the child support if he donates.
First, every tribe had their own rules.
It was mainly up to the women and their parents whether a fellow could marry their daughter, and female elders generally could put the skids to things.
When one of the participants could be a relative, yeah, it keeps the kids from having some of the more obvious defects.
They should be able to sell their women as slaves.
No, they sold other people's women, captured on raids, if they sold anyone.
The chief should decide who they marry.
Not in any tribe I know of. It was a decision first made by the participants, and likely, if vetoed, vetoed by the elder women (who knew who was how closely related). Spouses tended to come from another band because bands were often extended family units.
They should be able to marry them off at a very young age.
How young is young? The marriage age of consent in Colonial society was as low as 14 in some areas. My grandmother was an old maid of 16 when she and my grandfather entered into a lifelong marriage that only ended with my grandfather's death at nearly 80; my grandmother lived to 101. Try to beat that.
Now we raise neotenic children who aren't as mature at 30 as my grandparent's generations was at 15. So don't use modern child development as a metric.
The men should be able to have as many wife’s as they can afford.
Think about that. You live in a small lodge, women are territorial, at least when it comes to their home. You can't afford more than one wife.
Then finally they should be able to kill them any time they want.
White man's fantasy. Really. Sounds like someone is projecting Muslims on Indians (feather, not dot). Children were generally not beaten, nor wives, and anyone who did would have to answer to the extended family. Only the lowest of the low would beat their wife or children. Murder would not go over well and might lead to slowly feeding an anthill.
In a small unit society such crap simply cannot be tolerated.
The women should do most of the hard physical labor.
Hey! (but seriously), there were jobs for everyone. No slackers. Would you rather have them pulling guard duty while the men are chewing hides and cooking?
Everyone had a job. The men were the fighters and hunters, and some were craftsmen, the women took care of the housework, including setting it up and taking it down. The men could do all these other tasks, they had learned them as children at their mother's knee. But push come to shove, the primary job of the men was to hunt and defend the band, not that the women couldn't fight, too. (As my wife says, "How many of those men could breast feed a baby?"--good point.)
Just like they did before the evil white man came.
Who is this guy? Is he the same one as the rich White man? I never met him.
Be honest there some of my Alaskan native relatives are dumbfounded that my state California gave okay to gay marriage they just confused LOL!
Tee hee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.