NY-Adult biological parent sues for the right to marry their adult biological offspring

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,738
There is no judicial way this lawsuit can fail after all the other precedents that have been set.

Love is love, you cis-normative shitlords.


New York Parent Files Lawsuit to Marry Adult Child

https://www.breitbart.com/local/2021/04/14/new-york-parent-files-lawsuit-marry-adult-child/

Katherine Rodriguez 14 Apr 2021

A New York parent who wishes to marry their own adult child filed a lawsuit to overturn the incestuous practice, saying the matter should be up to the “individual.”

“Through the enduring bond of marriage, two persons, whatever relationship they might otherwise have with one another, can find a greater level of expression, intimacy and spirituality,” the parent, who seeks to remain anonymous, argued in the Manhattan federal court claim filed April 1.

“The proposed spouses are adults,” the filing continued. “The proposed spouses are biological parent and child. The proposed spouses are unable to procreate together.”

(Twenty bucks says they're queeer. - AF)

According to New York law, incest is a third-degree felony with a penalty of up to four years in prison. Incestuous marriages are also considered void, and spouses are punished with a fine and up to six months in jail.

Marriage licenses in New York City require potential spouses to write down their birth parents and sign off saying there are “no legal impediments to the marriage,” according to the Office of the City Clerk’s marriage license page.

The parent is asking a federal judge to declare the incest laws unconstitutional and unenforceable in their case, which the lawsuit cites as falling under the category of “Parent and Adult Child Non-Procreationable” couples.

The case is Doe v. McSweeney, No. 1:21-cv-2806 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
 
Get government out of marriage. Period.

These freak situations are extremely rare. However, if it remains a government imperative, you can bet that they will become more common.
 
Mark my words:
The left is going to legalize beastiality.

Finally.

Seriously... if you need a law to prevent you from having sex with animals you have bigger issues. I'm not sure I understand the mentality of, "I'd really like to fuck my goat, but if it weren't for those damned laws!"
 
Where did these "incest" laws come from anyway?

It wasn't the Bible.

sounds like herd management..

and it doesn't apply to Royals.
 
Mark my words:
The left is going to legalize beastiality.

Yes, they will, that is one of the "markers" on the war front they are waging.

There are two prongs of this attack, both serving different goals:

1 - One is the more esoteric goal of moving the ball down the field of Marxism. Weirdo-sexualism accomplishes this a number of ways, first by turning objective reality on its head and by forcing to accept insanity as objective truth, i.e. the fat man in a dress with chemically enhanced tits is a woman, and you will accept that without question. It saps the will of the targeted population, removes incentives for men and women to support and nurture each other and grows a general sense of FUD. It also controls the population that is targeted for destruction.

2 - Is the normalization of the pre-pubescent pedophilia and sexual "snuff". These are the end game taboos.
 
...
2 - Is the normalization of the pre-pubescent pedophilia and sexual "snuff". These are the end game taboos.

But if they normalize that, what will they do in their secret rituals and use to blackmail each other? They have not thought this through.

(And I appreciate the additional descriptor of “pre-pubescent”, as opposed to those who conflate pedophilia with 17 year old rock star groupies.)
 
Get government out of marriage. Period.

These freak situations are extremely rare. However, if it remains a government imperative, you can bet that they will become more common.

Exactly!

Gov has absolutely no business in marriage- what consenting adults do should be their choice, and no one else's business.
 
(And I appreciate the additional descriptor of “pre-pubescent”, as opposed to those who conflate pedophilia with 17 year old rock star groupies.)
Wyman was creepily too old for that girl, but Steven Tyler at 25? He was barely legal himself (to drink alcohol).
She was 16, and Tyler became her "guardian" and got her hooked on dope, to make her completely dependent on him.

You haven't further explained after my reaction to your post defending Tyler.
Paedophilia-in-Hollywood#post7032135
 
Exactly!

Gov has absolutely no business in marriage- what consenting adults do should be their choice, and no one else's business.

Exactly. But you have to remember, those who plead and beg to pay for permission and licenses are the same ones who vote and glorify politicians before their own God. Most, though not all, humans have the intellect of a gnat, and seek out their own enslavement just to say they’ve won.
 
Get government out of marriage. Period.

These freak situations are extremely rare. However, if it remains a government imperative, you can bet that they will become more common.

You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice.

The moment government arrogated to itself the authority to define marriage, it made the subject a matter to be dealt with, not organically by culture, but politically by force.

Thus, the issue is now to be decided by whichever groups or factions can keep or acquire sufficient political power to impose their agenda.

By making definitions or "defenses" of marriage a matter of formal government policy rather than of informal cultural consensus, conservatives gifted progressives with one of the levers they needed to exploit issues of sexuality to fuller advantage, thereby reducing the amount of work they otherwise would have had to do in order to get to the same place. (This is why, when conservatives try to "legislate morality," the progressives so often end up beating them over the head with it.)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top