Index of SPPS Budget Discussion
http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/spps-posts.html
_________________________________________
Unfortunately Mr. Sprangel pulls out the old canards
in an attempt to discredit Gay Marriage. He asks won't
Gay Marriage lead to "sodomy", "bigamy", underage
girls being forced into marriage and polygamy. He ends
with two totally absurd arguments "Can one elderly
person who is working and gets excellent health
coverage -- . . . -- be able to marry twenty or thirty
of their friends and get everyone some really awesome
medical coverage?" and also asks Dave's resolution
might go against DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) and
couldn't the City be charged with "terrorism".
He left out one argument that anti-gay marriage
opponents used up at the Capital two weeks ago,
seriously, that gay marriage would lead to bestiality
and people marrying their parakeets or cats.
The answer is very simple. State law should be amended
to read, "Marriage in the State of Minnesota shall be
restricted to two consenting adults of legal age."
I have not seen the resolution, but it can be very
simple. "The City of St. Paul opposes amending both
the Minnesota and United States Constitutions to
define marriage."
Lastly, I doubt that there is anyone in prison in
Minnesota for either sodomy or polygamy. If there is
anyone in prison for sodomy right now, they are being
wrongfully imprisoned. When I was considering a
challenge to the State's sodomy laws back in 1990, the
research I got then said there had not been a
prosecution in the state, for sodomy for at least 50
years. Secondly, even if someone was in prison
strictly for sodomy, they should have been freed after
the Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court decision handed
down last fall, which in invalidated sodomy laws
nationwide.
I trust this will answer all of Mr. Sprangel's fears
about sodomy, polygamy, group marriages, parakeets and
terrorism prosecutions under DOMA.
Dan Dobson
Summit Hill - Saint Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=======================================================
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 02:05:02 EST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [StPaul] Sodomy & Bigamy Laws
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Councilman Thune -
It may surprise some who know me to hear that I
have some questions about the same-sex marriage
resolution. My questions actually do not deal with
homosexuality, but with some other sex and marriage
laws, namely the sodomy laws and the bigamy laws
that are on the books in Minnesota. I expect there
are at least a few guys sitting in jail for both. And
what we call bigamy is expressly accepted in the Koran
and the Book of Mormon. "Handmaidens" and multiple
wives are also described as part of the Old Testament,
yet we have legislated against it.
Many bigamy laws were originally aimed at the
Mormons, because the idea polygamy did not square with
how the way a bunch of angry, Bible beating Eastern US
Christians wanted everyone to live. In Missouri it
was legal to shoot a Mormon on sight and the law
stayed on the books until around 1995, I think. The
Koran also allows some sorts of homosexual activity
with young boys, as long as you don't enjoy it and
keep your mind on Allah.
What sorts of sexual activity will be accepted
with the resolution? Is it limited to men with men
and women with women? What about a man and two women
(some people I am acquainted with) who are in a
tight group marriage? What about three men who have
lived together for several years? Can the three of
them get married?
Some other types of marriages are actually
practiced [yes, even here in Minnesota] such as group
marriages that are not tight. What happens when one
person from a group marriage takes a partner from
another group marriage? Would everyone have some
legal standing before the law? What would the
limitations on such a partnership be for issues
such as health insurance?
Which brings us to non-sexual partnerships. Could
the people involved be underage? In Kansas, for
example, a 12 year old female (14 for males) can marry
with either parental consent or the consent of a
judge, which is almost automatic if the female is
pregnant. In New Hampshire it is 14 years for a male,
13 for a female. In Mississippi there are no age
limits, with consent, 17 for males and 15 for females,
without consent from anyone. The same is true in
California, though some other statutes may apply.
Utah, 14. Texas, 14. So, if one of your neighbors
kids needs medical help and we have loosened the
marriage contracts enough, a person could just marry
the kid and get them all the medical help they need,
even if you are already married (in a gay
relationship, in a group marriage, et. al).
Would this be acceptable? How do you think the
insurance companies would react to this turn of
events? [I suspect our rates would skyrocket.]
What about the elderly? Can the one elderly
person who is working and gets excellent health
coverage -- like the package our bus drivers
are currently signed on to and striking to retain --
be able to marry twenty or thirty of their friends and
get everyone some really awesome medical coverage?
[Personally, I think this sounds kind of
funny and cool at the same time, but I doubt the
insurance company would like it.]
In Minnesota, we have some laws on the books about
sodomy, or at least we used to. So, even a married
couple would have to watch it to make sure that they
did not break any "laws of nature" and so forth. Are
we going to ignore these laws now? What about people
who may be sitting in jail right now because of them?
What about the Defense of Marriage act? It's a
federal law, Councilman Thune, are you willing to
sign off on engaging in civil disobedience to thwart
this act? While I doubt the authorities will do
anything about a city resolution, they might
just decide that what you are proposing is a form of
terrorism and is covered by the Patriot Act. Are you
willing to go that far? Do you think you should
encourage your friends on the city council to support
you in this? Such a thing will very likely cost the
city federal dollars if the current congressional
oversight committees decide that Saint Paul is
being a problem. How much is this resolution worth to
the city? $5,000,000? $10,000,000. Or let's say
its worth just $50,000 -- just one school teacher. If
you think this is overstated, just remember
that Jose Pidello (sp), a US citizen, has been jailed
as a terrorist -- without council, trial, charge or
bail -- for about 2 1/2 years now, just
for looking at legal websites.
As a rule, I honestly think we need to get the
government out of our bedrooms. However, I would like
to have some answers before I sign off on some broad
resolution to change the existing marriage laws.
Some might say that all this couldn't happen.
That no one would allow it. I think that's what they
said a few years ago about gay marriage. The only
thing that constrains the marriage laws now are a
handful of generally accepted practices that are based
more on English common law than on the Bible or
anything else. I hope Councilman Thune can answer
these questions, since he has said he plans to author
a resolution about it.
And one last question, councilman. Exactly what
will your resolution say?
Brett Sprangel
East Side
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
_____________________________________________
SPPS Budget Reduction Forum - Feb. 23-27
Co-Sponsored By NEAT: http://www.stpaulneat.org/
_____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
