Same-sex couples are redefining family law in USA

USA TODAY ^ | Feb 18 | Joan Biskupic

[apackof2]

The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) on March 26 will consider a challenge to Texas' law.

Is there is constitional right to homosexual sex??

[new cruelty]

Constitutional right to man-on-man action?... Last I checked, no.

[FreeTally]

Is there is constitional right to homosexual sex??

Its a natural right, just like "heterosexual sex". No piece of paper can give it, or take it away. Busyboddy's wishes notwithsatnding.

[Protagoras]

Is there is constitional right to homosexual sex??

Rights do not emanate from the constitution. And they need not be enumerated there to exist.

[Lunatic Fringe]

Working around Nebraska law, the couple drafted wills, a parenting agreement and other papers that spell out their responsibilities for Grayson. ''We are trying to do everything we can to tie ourselves together legally and bind me to our son,'' says Colley, whose salary and benefits provide for the family.

That's right- they can draw up a contract regarding support and benefits that would be legally binding and not force the state or the citizens of the state to accept their screwball lifestyle.

[Lunatic Fringe]

The Declaration claims "Certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness...."

People have the right to engage in activity that makes them happy provided it does not violate the rights of others.

[onedoug]

Natural? Based on what?

[WriteOn]

>>the new age in family law

should be: the "new age" in family law.

The media loves to sensationalize the infintesimally small segments of society.

GBLT are attempting to transform the future by raising it. What a shame.

[Ohioan]

''Sexual orientation should be irrelevant,'' says Shannon Minter, McGriff's attorney. ''Unless you're living under a rock, you know the way people live has changed.''

Perhaps the clearest evidence that we are comimng to the end of an era, is that an article such is that posted can appear in what purports to be a major mainline newspaper, and someone can with a straight face make a statement, such as that quoted. There have been many eras in the human past, when there was a breakdown in values; where people indulging their every whim, rationalized their own behavior and considered it a new social norm.

Such periods are usually followed by periods of great repression; periods when not only the bizarre and super-indulgent behavior is suppressed, but often relatively innocent behavior, as well. Social chaos almost always draws social repression--the pendulum effect. The exact form of the repression is impossible to predict. What is certain, however, is that these examples of aberrant behavior will not define the future of the American family.

It is a pity that the newspaper has so narrow a perspective that they can write something this silly.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[FreeTally]

Natural? Based on what?

As the poster in #7 put:

"People have the right to engage in activity that makes them happy provided it does not violate the rights of others."

Its very simple. I don't care for queers, crack heads or even rap music for that matter. My rights are not violated by someone engaging in sex, using crack or listening to rap. They have a natural right to engage in such.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

There is no "natural right" to sin.

[FreeTally]

There is no "natural right" to sin.

Good grief, we were given free will. Some of you are so off the wall its amazing.

[bvw]

There are NO "Constitutional Rights" -- the Constitution only defines the limited number of Federal powers -- and assures that certain pre-existant rights receive extra-special protection. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments clearly reserve ALL rights to the People, and all powers of government not ennumerated in the Federal Government to the States.

The words of the Ninth and Tenth are very clear, straightforward -- yet the ignorance of them is nigh total...

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

[bvw]

No homosexual sex is NOT a Natural Right! Natural Rights are those ordained "by Nature's God" -- in the words of the Declaration of Independence. We have very clear statements from "Nature's God" in this matter -- homosexual acts are not right, they are not by that rights -- words do have some meaning, and a right of a man must be understood like a duty as well as a privilege -- it is a Right because it is the proper thing.

[bvw]

So we are given free will, we are given hands and eyes too. Do we, then, infer that if our eyes see a pretty bauble on our nieghbor's neck, that we have a right to sin -- then to use our hands to slaughter the husband, rape the wife, take her baubles as a trophy, sell her and her whining kids into slavery and give their household over to some good buddy? Is that right? Why is that a right to *sin*?

[Thorondir]

Excellent, sir. Well said.

I have always wondered why a biological MALFUNCTION is called a sexual orientation by the PC crowd. A sexual malfunction that naturally brings an end to the creature's genetic line is a SEXUAL DISORIENTATION.

[IronJack]

That leaves the couple with another option: Leave Nebraska

If I had my way, it would be their ONLY option.

[joesnuffy]

I cant imagine what the Founding Father's would have thought about this....
I can imagine what they would have done about it...
These pervs in the Continental Army?...Valley Forge?

[onedoug]

"That is why democracy is inherently evil and was condemned by our founders."

If you're a secularist, how do define evil?