Infiltrating Immorality Into Law

by: kimberly meeks | published: 07 29, 2012

As long as there are a group of people exclaiming their “constitutional given rights,” the government will ride in like a knight in shining armor on a big white horse ready to save the day. Civil rights issues lead the campaign for government implemented rights; civil rights issues are the most divisive issues in society, exposing a wide spectrum of beliefs and perspectives.

With the election of ultra liberal Barack Hussein Obama, liberal activists gained a sense of boldness in their pursuit to push their liberal ideals – using the constitution as their guide. Since Mr. Obama has retained the title of president, we have witnessed homosexuals proclaim their rights to “marry,” atheists proclaim their rights against the “indoctrination” of Christianity, and low wage income earners proclaim their rights to their “fair share.”

The American Civil Liberties Union has been a source of support and recognition for liberal causes. The ACLU is a pioneer in the advancement of liberal pursuits. They boldly assert that they “work to extend rights to segments of our population that have traditionally been denied their rights, including people of color; women; lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender people.”

While some may want to support the rights of homosexuals, transgenders, prostitutes, nudists, polygamists, abortionists, etc., to freely boast of their chosen immorality, others want to maintain a standard of decency and morality in society and law. Therefore, many Americans support legislation that prohibits such behavior.

Currently, 7 states have anti-cohabitation legislation (Virginia, West Virginia, Florida, Michigan, Mississippi, North Dakota and North Carolina). The statutes are rarely enforced, but the behavior is still punishable. In 2005, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the state of North Carolina for its anti-cohabitation statute after a woman in Pender County lost her job because she was living with her boyfriend while employed at the Pender County Sheriff’s Department. Jennifer Rudinger, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina stated, "The idea that government criminalizes people's choice to live together out of wedlock in this day and age defies logic and common sense.” The basis for the ACLU’s lawsuit was derived from the 2003 US Supreme Court case, Lawrence v. Texas, which declared a Texas law that prohibited sexual acts between same sex couples to be unconstitutional.

In 2006, a North Carolina state judge declared the North Carolina anti-cohabitation statute unconstitutional, and the ACLU won the lawsuit. Although Deborah Hobbs (the plaintiff in the lawsuit) was never charged with a crime, the ACLU pursued the lawsuit because “the threat to enforce the law prompted her to quit her job,” according to a 2006 USA Today article. The hit TLC show, “Sister Wives,” opened the door for a more accepting dialogue of the polygamist lifestyle. Featured as average Americans, the Brown family has been working to change the perception of polygamy. The Brown family has recently filed a lawsuit against the state of Utah, to overturn the state’s bigamy law as unconstitutional. In Utah, bigamy is a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

The lawsuit was in response to the ongoing investigation against the Browns shortly after the show aired. The Browns’ attorney, Jonathan Turley, stated, “Their lawsuit doesn't aim to challenge Utah's right to refuse recognition of multiple licenses, nor are the Browns seeking them. They just want to be left alone, and not labeled felons.” But the motive was political, as well. Turley also stated the Browns’ “arrangement” is “ consensual and one made in the privacy of their own household and should therefore be legal.” The basis for Turley’s argument rested in the Lawrence v TexasSupreme Court case – the “go to” court decision for the legalization of any act deemed unconstitutional, that is sexual in nature.

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff moved to dismiss the lawsuit, asserting that no charges were going to be filed against the Browns for their polygamist lifestyle, as long as they were not found to be committing “other crimes,” such as underage marriages or child abuse.

The “discrimination” of polygamist “marriages” is deemed necessary, given the history of crime within polygamist sects - noting Warren Jeffs, polygamist who was given a life sentence for child sex and bigamy. Homosexual “marriage” is more widely accepted than polygamist “marriage” for that very reason, which is perhaps the only reason why the ACLU has not snagged the opportunity to back the Browns in their pursuit.

Of the landmark decision in Lawrence v Texas, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his dissention that the ruling could create a problem for other laws that try to hinder the advancement of immoral or sexual behaviors found to be unacceptable, including “ fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality and obscenity.”

According to an article from the Christian Post Reporter, “Conservatives have been warning lawmakers that amending laws governing moral sexual behavior would open the floodgates for all kinds of consensual sexual relationships including polygamy.” Robert Land, President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, “warns that America is falling into a downward spiral of sin,” the article reports. “Land said he is not surprised by Brown's attempts to redefine marriage. He says those who ask the question "Who are you to impose your morality on someone else?" are asserting that "the ultimate value is self-fulfillment.” If the ultimate value is a person's self-fulfillment ... well [then] they can say: 'I find myself fulfilled in having consensual sex with my adult sister.”

Land compared the “downward spiral of sin” to the book of Romans One, where “they begin toworshipthemselves, then they begin to have unnatural sex with people of the same sex ... and then it goes on to describe people who love violence, and people without natural affection.”

If the legality of any sexual act is defined by the government as to whether or not it is consensual, then morality has no standing under the law. What does that mean for our society?

Many Christians concur that the rise in immorality in society and the advancement of immoral behavior by both state and federal governments are merely a sign of the nearing of rapture. While disdain implodes their intolerance, those who oppose the infiltration of immorality into law respect the implementation of free will upon all men, and the reality that judgment is yet to come.

add a comment