For Immediate Release: May 21, 2015
Contact: Diane Gramley 1.814.271.9078 or 1.814.437.5355
Sex Between Father and Adopted Son — In Any Other Situation This Would be Called Incest
(Harrisburg) — Two homosexual men used adoption in their estate planning — one adopted the other. As a legal adoption had taken place, weren’t their sexual relations considered incest under the law? In any other adoption situation, wouldn’t it be considered incest and repugnant? Would an adult male heterosexual be permitted to adopt an adult male friend? The homosexual couple has now had the adoption vacated so they can “marry” in Bucks County, PA. As the American Family Association of Pennsylvania (AFA of PA), a statewide advocate for one man one woman marriage, has pointed out in the past the redefinition of marriage will lead down paths never imagined a few short years ago.
“The judicial activism by Judge John E. Jones last May opened the door to this scenario. Where else will it lead? Here’s one example – a threesome was married in Massachusetts a year and a half ago. In 2013, a pro-homosexual attorney said the Supreme Court decision striking Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act has opened the door for polygamist and incestuous marriages. We are on that path,” commented Diane Gramley, president of the AFA of PA.
The July 2006 statement ‘Beyond Same-Sex Marriage” was one of the more recent documents to give an in-depth outline of the desire (demand) by homosexual activists that marriage and family be redefined. “In contrast to the “conservative” argument, which holds that gay marriage will strengthen the unique appeal of marriage itself, the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage statement claims that gay marriage is a critical step in a larger evolution away from the preference for any specific family form. In other words, the sponsors of Beyond Same-Sex Marriage hope to dissolve marriage, not through formal abolition, but by gradually extending the hitherto unique notion of marriage to every conceivable family type.”
Boris Dittrich, the homosexual activist called the “father” of the political movement in favor of Dutch gay “marriage”, has admitted that group marriages of three or more people, is the next, inevitable logical step in the dismantling of the western world’s traditional marriage laws.
Citing the US Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas in his 91-page opinion in Brown v. Buhman, on Dec. 13, 2013, U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups struck down Utah’s law making polygamy a crime. This lawsuit was the brainchild of Prof. Jonathan Turley at George Washington University. He’s designed a two-step strategy, piggybacking on same-sex marriage: first, decriminalize polygamy, then assert a right to official recognition of polygamy. As Turley explained in previous court filings, he believes there is a “right to self-determination of private relations and family matters free of government intrusion.” He noted that many oppose polygamy, and goes on to assert that polygamists “are entitled to protection from such majoritarian animus and bias vis-à-vis their private lifestyles and relations. Their status under domestic law is a civil rights issue deserving the same protections afforded to homosexuals and other minority groups.”
“The redefinition of marriage affects everyone-all of society. As the door is opened wider and the foundation of a nation is remade, that nation will crumble even as the house with a faulty foundation will collapse. We may feel compassion for two 70 year old men in Bucks County, but they are being misinformed, as are thousands of others, when they are told they will be embarking on a genuine marriage. Marriage was not defined by man, thus man does not have the authority to redefine it, but our nation’s families and children will suffer in the effort,” Gramley concluded.
# # #