Martin Luther King, Jr.

In the US, Monday is a holiday, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. He was a giant in the fight for civil rights. Over four decades after he was assassinated, the fight for civil rights continues.

History is on our side. Consenting adults will have their rights to love, sex, and marriage.

Equal Protection Under the Law

David Epstein’s lawyer Matthew Galluzzo wrote to Yes But However and makes the legal case for striking down laws against consensual consanguineous sex, while still trying to hint at a personal disapproval of such sex.

Second, I am a criminal defense attorney and not a religious leader or political activist, and accordingly, my argument is a legal one, not a moral or political one. I have never argued that homosexuality is the moral equivalent of incest, nor would I. I have never argued that the two are somehow similar biologically, psychologically, or ethically…

The comparison between the two is purely a legal one, and the legal argument that I am making is not a novel one – in fact, no less a legal scholar than Justice Scalia has already made it. I suggest that you read his dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, but I will summarize the case for you:

This is very, very important.

Perhaps you didn’t realize it, but up until 2003, homosexual sodomy was still illegal in Texas and a few other states. Mr. Lawrence was arrested in Texas after being caught in the act by police officers in his own home, and was convicted of a crime as a result! He challenged the constitutionality of the state ban on sodomy, and initially lost because the Supreme Court had previously upheld the constitutionality of a similar state-level ban on sodomy in Bowers v. Hardwick in 1986.

However, in 2003, the Supreme Court overturned its own recent decision in Bowers v. Hardwick and declared that Mr. Lawrence had a constitutional right to engage in sodomy in the privacy of his own home, and that public opinion about the morality of such conduct was no longer a valid basis to deny him that liberty.

This same reasoning can be applied to poly and consanguineous sex.

In the dissenting opinion, Scalia countered that as a result of this logic, there is a very valid argument to be made that there is now a constitutional right to engage in acts of consensual adult incest. That is the argument that I am now making on behalf of my client, and i explained that to both ABC News and the Huffington Post.

I hope his argument works.

If your counter-argument is that incest ought to be illegal because it is always coercive (and thus, the ban on it is necessary to advance a compelling state interest), then I ask you the following questions:

1) Should it be illegal for a 33 year old sister and a 34 year old brother to have sex with each other? Is that relationship really coercive?

Very good question, because of course it shouldn’t be illegal. Also, for people who claim that all parent-adult child sex is coercive, I want to know at what point the coercion shifts to the child, given that some aging parents exhibit increasing dependence on their child?

2) Should all coercive sex result in an arrest? If so, the police would need to start arresting bosses for having sex with their secretaries, rich older men for having sex with younger less-wealthy people, and so on, and so on. Fortunately for them, there is nothing in the New York penal law that makes “coercive” sex illegal in the absence of force.

Go read the whole thing. John Romano indicates that he is his not on board with solidarity, but doesn’t refute Galluzzo’s points.

Consanguineous Sex Among the Elites

Much is being made of the arrest of Columbia University professor David Epstein's arrest on incest charges for having consensual sex with his adult daughter.

I've been a little busy. I plan to have a good look here on Monday (tomorrow) at both the situation and the reaction to it. There is much to write.

The US Has Always Had Polygamy

But it has long been illegal. Over at this blog, the writer discusses legalizing polygamy in the US and making things better as a result.

There are all forms of what would tantamount to polygamy going on in the United States.

Polygamy is defined by dictionary.reference.com as “1: the practice or condition of having more than one spouse, esp. wife, at one time. 2: the habit or system of mating with more than one individual, either simultaneously or successively.”

From this definition one can clearly see the practice of polygamy going on in the United States without being in the traditional or Biblical Old Testament form of polygamy.

We should at least give people the option of raising these children in marriage.

The constitution grants the freedom of religion, yet within the same constitution, polygamy is illegal.

The American Constitution clearly grants the freedom of religion, but polygamy is not mentioned directly. Nor is monogamy. It would fall under equal protection. Under equal protection and the freedoms of religion and association, polygamy should be allowed.

The United States makes a great show of monogamy yet unofficially practice polygamy in so many ways. We are all aware of the role mistress’s play in our society. There are so many politicians and athletes who have mistresses and cheated against their spouses with other people. In some instances they cheat with people of the same sex.

This is one way polygamy can actually bring more order and stability and equality. Rather than only two people being legal spouses to each other and the rest of the people they are involved with (with the understanding of both spouses) being second-class citizens, everyone can be treated equally.

The blogger writes from experience…

I came from a polygamous family myself. My late dad had two wives and my mother is the second surviving wife. In the African culture, it is allowed but it doesn’t mean any man can go out there and accumulate wives without being responsible for the upbringing and provision for his household. It is an obligation, which must be fulfilled in all circumstances. There are men out there paying child support to numerous women and in some instances are dead beat dads. If the practice of polygamy was legalized I believe that it would drastically reduce some divorce situations which main objective is to gain financially from one of the spouse involved. My concluding question is what is the difference when a man is legally married and yet father’s multiple children outside of the marriage?

The difference, of course, is that it is likely the children whose mothers aren’t considered the man’s legal spouse suffer. No, not all of these people would be married togther if they could, but some would. And why should they be stopped? This is also the problem children of same-sex couples are facing in most states, where same-sex marriage is still banned, and children being raised by close family members who aren’t allowed to legally marry. Full marriage equality will be better for the adults and the children. Rather than trying to force everyone into one narrow form of marriage, which is clearly contributing to the high divorce rate, why not allow adults to choose for themselves?

Freedom Map For Same Sex Couples

The Los Angeles Times has a map that indicates levels of the freedom to marry in different states in the USA for same-sex (nonconsanguineous, presumably) couples.

I'm sure there are better maps out there and ones that detail other countries, and I'd be happy to link to them, too.

Amendment or Supreme Court Ruling?

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Reynolds v. United States (1878) that polygamy is not a Constitutionally-protected right. This has allowed the U.S. government to ban it. Even if the U.S. government didn’t ban, it the ruling allows states to ban it. The only way to ensure the right to polygamy would be for either a new Supreme Court decision reversing the old one, or a Constitutional amendment: the Marriage Equality Amendment. A court reversal could come as part of a ruling about same-sex marriage.

Striking down DOMA in a way that just sends the matter back to the states still leaves all of those states with laws banning gay marriage, polygamy, and consanguineous marriage. If, however, the court rules that the right to marriage should negate not only DOMA but most state marriage bans, that would be great. But what are the chances of that? If it doesn’t happen, then adding an amendment to the American Constitution, which isn’t easy, would be the best way of granting full marriage equality.