Posted on 01/05/2005 3:44:28 AM PST by Catholic54321
In two separate cases, former lesbians who are now Christians are in a child custody battle with their ex-partners. A Christian attorney says one of those cases, taking place in Virginia, demonstrates conflicts between both state and federal laws.
In 2000, Lisa Miller and Janet Jenkins went to Vermont and entered into a civil union. They returned home to Virginia where Miller gave birth to a child through artificial insemination. The two then moved to Vermont.
After the relationship dissolved, Miller -- who has become a Christian -- took her daughter and moved back to Virginia. Jenkins filed a complaint in Vermont to have "parent-child contact." Miller took action in Virginia and the court declared her the sole parent of her daughter. The Virginia court, which does not recognize civil unions, also refused the Vermont order.
Florida-based Liberty Counsel is representing Miller in the case. Mat Staver, president and general counsel, says not only are the states' law clashing, but federal laws are conflicting as well.
"There is the federal law known as the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act, which says one state must recognize an out-of-state order involving custody," Staver explains. "But there is [another] statute, called the federal Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA], which says one state doesn't have to recognize an out-of-state, same-sex marriage or union, or any rights that come from such a union."
In a brief filed on Monday (January 3), Liberty Counsel argues that the federal DOMA prevails over the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act on matters relating to same-sex unions. They also contend any interference with Miller's parental rights to raise her child would violate her parental rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
According to Staver, the case illustrates the need for a federal marriage amendment. "Same-sex unions will inevitably cause havoc among the states, and one state law collides with another," the attorney explains. "Since children are caught in the middle of this battle, Congress should move quickly to pass a bill to amend the U.S. Constitution to preserve traditional marriage."
Voters across the nation, he says, should be allowed to vote on such an amendment -- "and put an end to this madness," he adds.
Visitation Rights Awarded A similar case is brewing in Utah, where the ex-partner of a former lesbian -- who is now a Christian -- has sued for visitation rights of the Christian woman's two-year-old daughter. Over objections that the religious and moral convictions of the Christian woman must be considered, the trial court ordered that visitation rights be awarded -- even though the ex-partner has no biological linkage to the child. Like Virginia, Utah does not recognize same-sex unions.
The case has been appealed to the Utah Supreme Court by the Pacific Justice Institute. Brad Dacus, PJI president, says he finds the case "particularly disturbing."
"A parent with newfound moral convictions should be allowed to cut the ties to the past -- if not for herself, at least for her child -- without interference by unrelated third parties and activist courts," Dacus says, adding that while he remains optimistic about the case, it demonstrates his firm will be doing "a lot of heavy lifting" in the coming year.
Moley - I'm taking a kind of sabbatical from much FR activity for a while due to overwhelming personal responsibilities... DirtyHarryY2K is taking the baton for the Homosexual Agenda Ping list, and I know he would appreciate getting alerted to relevant articles!
I'll be checking in when I can, but can't do my HA list. I'll try to get back to my Moral Absolutes Ping list sooner as it is solely dependent on my "pleasure" - whatever interests me and I have time for.
Happy And Blessed New Year to you and yours!
One of the problems of the modern liberal viewpoint is that the result of it's prescriptions for achieving a more just and equitable society ends up violating the "law of unintended consequences." We've only now begun to see it after having bought into the argument that "sexual orientation" is a defining characteristic of a "protected class" of people somewhat analogous to race. That in itself was the first error. Instead of defining homosexual acts as contrary to the "natural law" as defined by Aristotle (hardly a Christian) we "moderns" lost insight as to why it is contrary to "natural law" because "natural law" arguments fell into disfavor around the middle of the 19th century. The irony of all of this, is that the "Founding Fathers" used the same arguments in the structuring of our political economy. If you're interested in finding out how much the "natural law" has fallen into disfavor, point out that when Jefferson wrote "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" he was using an argument straight out of Aristotle's "Nicomachaen Ethics" and see how many blank stares you get. On top of this, Aristotle references the God of Nature in his argument and any theologian or moral philosopher can point out, that this doesn't necessarily have to be the transcendent deity embraced by monotheism. In fact Aristotle's metaphysics places this God intrinsic in Nature instead of being transcendent. Something that was felt to be a short-coming by both Moses Maimonides and St. Thomas Aquinas but is an actual advantage when it comes to making a "natural law" argument, because it allows you to select any God of you're understanding, even if it's the "God of Science."
It's bad enough that kids have to suffer through divorce with their hetero parents these days. Why add fuel to the fire?
/flame away
If you want on/off the list let me know.
Children should not have sacrifice their natural right to both a father and a mother just to satisfy two selfish perverts that place their sexual preference above the spiritual and emotional needs of a child.
Spot on, and hitting the nail on the head.
Voters across the nation, he says, should be allowed to vote on such an amendment -- "and put an end to this madness," he adds.
Catholic Ping - please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
I predicted this a while back. The lawyers are behind legalizing homosexual marriage. Look who's benefitting from the predictable chaos...lawyers!
Thanks for the ping. A relative of mine has informed us that he intends to "marry" his partner. I am not going to attend. Please pray for my family. This will cause a rift, I think, as most of them are all for it.
Coeur de Lion, good post. I think that part of the reason we have ended up at this point is ignorance of another of Aristotle's maxims: The least initial deviation from the truth is multiplied later tenfold.
(previous post corrected to read accurately)
Coeur de Lion, good post. I think that part of the reason we have ended up at this point is ignorance of another of Aristotle's maxims: The least initial deviation from the truth is multiplied later a thousandfold.
Well put!
Unfortunately, just the latest manifestation of treating children as accessories in this so-called "child-centered" culture: the yuppie types who have just one child, apparently to prove they can and so that they won't "miss" a human experience; abortion for sex-selection; all the talk about genetic discoveries and the possibility of "designer children."
Didn't Aristotle define God as pure act? Wouldn't this God transcend nature?
In that sense, yes. But I was thinking more along the lines of cosmology and the theory of creation ex nihilo. Aristotle's God is confined to a universe with no beginning or end. I think the God of revealed religion proposes not a God confined to a universe with no beginning or end(Aristotelian), or a cyclic one of creation/re-creation(Eastern), but one which transcends even those. One who gives purpose as to why there's even a universe at all.
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.