Foundation files two briefs with US Supreme Court; Defends Marriage
Connect With Us
On January 29, 2013, the Foundation for Moral Law filed two briefs in the United States Supreme Court which soughtto protect traditional marriage. The Foundation’s Constitutional Scholar, Colonel John Eidsmoe, J.D., D.Min., was the primary author of the briefs filed in the cases of Dennis Hollingsworth v. Kristin Perry (case no. 12-144) and United States of America v. Edith Schlain Windsor (case no. 12-307).
In Hollingsworth, the Foundation argued that California’s Proposition 8, which made gay marriage unconstitutional in that state, was itself a constitutional way to define marriage. FML also argued that same sex-marriage is not a right but that marriage is a government recognition of a divinely established institution. Eidsmoe wrote in part “the Constitution is utterly silent about same-sex marriage. To read into the Constitution a protection of same-sex marriage, is to commit the very folly that President Washington warned against: changing the Constitution by usurpation.” You can read the Foundation’s brief here.
Windsor is a case which challenges the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. The Foundation argued that DOMA is allowed under a plain reading of the Constitution. The Foundation told the Court they should follow the Constitution, plain and simple. “The Second Circuit says the nonexistent equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment requires the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages, even though the Supreme Court has never said the actual Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that the states recognize same-sex marriages. How can it be, that the non-existent equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment is stronger than the actual Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth? This anomaly demonstrates the danger and folly of allowing the federal judiciary to depart from the plain language of the Constitution and the intent of its Framers, and to wander aimlessly in the trackless fields of their own imaginations.” You can read the entire filing here.
The Foundation for Moral Law is committed to protecting the Constitution on every judicial level. Your support of the Foundation makes our invovlement in cases like these possible.
Posted by admin on Thursday, February 7th, 2013 @ 3:26PM
Categories: News
Tags: amicus brief, DOMA, Eidsmoe, family, marriage, Proposition 8, Supreme Court, Traditional Marriage
I am a bit confused here. As far as I can tell allowing gay people to get married doesn’t stop heterosexuals from getting married, does it? So “traditional” marriage isn’t being touched. So it doesn’t need to be defended.
I must be missing some subtle nuance.
Dear David:
It isn’t that allowing gay marriage would stop heterosexuals from married, it is that allowing gay marriage would be redefining marriage as The Bible defines it and would be morally reprehensible to God. God intended marriage to be between a man and a woman as is outlined clearly in Genesis 2:18-24. When we as individuals or as a Nation do things that are flatly contrary to God’s law, we declare war on God and invite His judgement. Herein is the real issue. There is no such thing as “gay” marriage. Marriage, as defined by God is between a man and a woman. To defining as anything else is to provoke God.
Marriage is a Constitutional Issue. Do Constitutional Issues go before courts; or, do these Issues go before Congress for Judgment?
Let me begin to explain to you the solid grounds on which I stand to determine that marriage is the union between one man and one woman.
Does our government have any Interest in the Institution of marriage? Absolutely!
Supreme Court Judges seem to be judging these same sex marriage cases with their personal feelings and emotions. Law has no feelings and emotions; it only sees legalities.
The Eyes of the Law, sees no people; it sees no color; it sees no religion; and it sees no sexes. It only sees the legal term of what people are. In the Eyes of the LAW, Law sees two types of people– Citizens or Aliens; the Right to be in this country or they have no Right to be in this country; the Right to receive government entitlements or not, etc.
Laws Interest is to totally guard and protect every one of its Legal American Citizens, small or large, whose actions and behaviors are good and right; and punish the actions and behaviors of its Citizens whose actions are evil and bad.
Government Interests in who has the Right to Marry should be the subject of discussion in these court cases, not family Issues and interests. Please follow my train of thought. Marriage is a GOVERNMENT INTEREST ISSUE.
This is a Federal, State and Constitutional Issue. This is the case of Linda Templet v The United States of America. Could I win this case if it was fought this way?
Does Marriage fall under the category of fundamental rights? Marriage is completely connected to the Constitutional INTERESTS of our government. The Marriage of one man and one woman is directly connected to the organization and administration of government.
What connects the marriage of one man and one woman to the organization and administration of government? That answer is the legalization of a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN that might or might not be created, formed and made from one American man and one American woman’s engagement of sexual activity.
This baby that is legally born, by WAY OF BIRTH, just entered our country. It automatically CONNECTS to the organization and administration of government. This baby, in the Eyes of the LAW, is a Legal NATURAL BORN American Citizen. This baby does not only receive the privilege of becoming a Natural Born true blooded American Citizen of United States because of the Marriage license which GRANTS the man and the woman to lawfully engage in a sexual activity, this baby also INHERITS every single legal right that every Legalized American Citizen of the United States has received from our government. This baby becomes connected with the INTEREST of the government as soon as it is born in this country. It, like every other Legal Citizen in this country has Legal Ties to government.
Can these thoughts be disputed by any court of law? This is solid grounds to stand on. We must take feeling and emotions out of the courts. We must fight this Marriage Law lining up completely with the Supreme Laws of our Land; not the opinions of Judges.
In order to enter into the legal system of marriage, one must get a government issued LICENSE through the States to marry. How does Constitutional Law define this word license? I see this word LICENSE is the KEY to defining marriage in the eyes of the Law. It is the KEY to marriage being defined as one man and one woman. It is the KEY to forever lock out any thoughts concerning the right for gay people to receive a License to marry.
Government has no interest in gay marriage whatsoever. Gay marriage cannot connect to an organization or administration of government through any sort or kind of License at all. They do have other Issues which connect to other things connected to the organization and administration of government but they cannot use a License to get the things that they want and desire. They would have to use the court system to get those things.
Marriage is not what we should be focusing on. Our focus should be on this word LICENSE.
The free dictionary on the internet states a license is the permission GRANTED by competent authority to exercise a certain PRIVILEDGE that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act. The certificate or the official document itself confers permission to ENGAGE in otherwise proscribed conduct.
A license gives a person or organization permission to engage in a particular ACTIVITY. So I ask you—what particular legal and lawful activity is a marriage license GRANTING to the man and woman who want to get married? Now what engagement of activity are these two people going to be actively doing?
They are going to engage in a lawful sexual activity. That is the activity of marriage. Now do gay couples need a license from the states for them to engage in sexual activity? That answer is no! Their engagement of sexual activity will never be of any INTEREST to the government because nothing can come out of that sexual activity that would help or hurt government. Their sexual activity does not TIE INTO the governing of our country nor does their sexual activity TIE INTO our Legal Economic Recovery system.
As I see it—this license GRANTS every citizen of legal age, of the United States of America, the permission to try to create, form or make another NATURAL BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN for The United States of America through the legal engagement of sexual activity. Every Citizen has that right! There is no favoritism through the Eyes of the Law. This is equality. One only gets a legal license through the states if their ACTIVITY might or might not produce something Natural that will connect with the organization or administration of government.
There is only ONE way to make a lawfully NEW NATURAL BORN CITIZEN for America—babies don’t come from the dust of the earth—they NATURALLY come from a man and a woman engaging in a sexual activity. These natural born citizens replenish our earth.
A birth certificate does not MAKE a Natural Born Citizen for America to connect with the organization and administration of government—people do. A birth certificate only declares the sex, weight and length of the baby, the time it entered this country, the parents name, the countries that the parents are from, the hospital it was born in and the DR. who delivered this child in this country. How does that prove a Legal Citizenship or the Nationality of the child? It doesn’t, but that is another Constitutional Issue.
This new baby, that ONLY a man and a woman can bring into this country, BY WAY OF BIRTH, automatically CONNECTS to the organization and administration of government the moment it is born in so many ways.
1. It connects to Citizenship
2. It connects to Future Economic Recovery—it will be TAXED when the child comes of age.
3. It connects to the Rights of a citizen
4. It connects to Legal Aid
5. It connects to every lawful thing that every other Citizen of this United States is connected to.
Now I ask you, am I on the RIGHT track? Everyone thinks that my thoughts are crazy. I get laughed at like I am some kind of fool.
Now I ask you, do I have a legal case or not? I believe that if we follow this train of thought we can clearly prove that marriage can only be licensed to one man and one woman.
I want to thank you for taking the time to read this. I have no money for any Lawyer but I do believe that I have solid grounds to stand on