A Supreme Court Victory for NAMBLA

 

by John Galt
June 30, 2013 22:30 ET

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) today released decisions ultimately which engaged in the dangerous type of legal activism that many have fretted about since the founding of the nation. In the scope of two rulings, United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry, the SCOTUS reversed several thousand years of civilized human history to create rights and affirm those powers of the court which neither exist within the scope of the U.S. Constitution nor the powers assigned to various branches of government.

After listening to numerous legal commentators, reviewing their papers, and of course reading the reviews plus decision itself, one thing is certain:

NAMBLA won a huge victory last week in the Supreme Court of the United States.

Who is “NAMBLA” and how did I reach this conclusion? More on that later.

First and foremost, I am not a jurist. I had an opportunity to go to law school but the desire to chase ambulances and smell like a dead possum in the road did not appeal to me, thus the option to earn less money but still maintain my some degree of self respect.

Historically speaking, an area of which I can speak from experience, the non-decisions decisions of the United States Supreme Court will shake this nation for years to come; at least until the entire system is overturned via tumult and quite probably an internal political revolution.

The decision to allow via a non-Constitutional route to deny citizen’s rights via Proposition 8 and the 10th Amendment should have alarmed the entire world; a United States not united under a Constitutional system is no different from that of 1862 America, where the rule of law was truly an ad hominem affair where states, counties, and localities determined not just what the rule of law consisted of, but how individual behavior was to be determined.

Despite the proclamations of the mainstream media, this has nothing to do with the “right” to have same sex marriages. This is more about the deconstruction of Western civilization and the willingness of the United States to participate in the mass suicide the Western European nations have engaged in already. Personally speaking, I could care less about the religious ceremonies of any two individuals regarding marriage or death; however, thanks to the Federal Reserve Act plus the 16th Amendment, the relational status of two American citizens is now crucial not to the understanding of the societal implications, but the very survival of our nation itself.

Two gay individuals can now marry.

So what?

That is fine but the decision under the majority opinion stated by Justice Kennedy, himself now an accused homosexual by CNN, states a clear course for not just LGBT proclamations for the right to marry but polygamy, and worse. The first thought of the so-called conservative “Christian Right” was that those bizzarro creatures known as Mormons should have the right to marry 100 women per male plus relatives, despite the fact that the LDS has banned polygamy for over 120 years. In reality, there is a far larger religious sect at play now, and that very religion is which  alleged to be that of the U.S. President now has a legal challenge of its own to deal with.

Under Sharia Law it has been a long standing practice where the male had the choice of a mate regardless of age as long as she was “pure.” The best way to ensure purity was to find a girl between the ages of six and twelve which was a practice accepted since Aisha married the prophet Mohammed when she was around six to seven years old.  In most Islamic cultures, the activity of marrying a child of purity to ensure that Allah would smile upon the offspring has been an accepted practice up to and including the use of financial transactions of wealthier Muslims providing dowries to lower caste citizens for attractive daughters for the purpose of  marriage and procreation. While this activity might sound shocking to the average American, in many parts of the world this an accepted cultural norm, providing the poor or lower middle class within many societies an opportunity to advance and provide for their families and improve the lot of their family name.

This brings us full circle to the North American Man Boy Love Association, aka, “NAMBLA.”

What does “NAMBLA” have to do with Islam? Nothing. 100% zero, zip, nada. However, the ideals endorsed by Justice Kennedy’s majority decision have everything to do with American reality and the ability of a forty year old man to marry a twelve year old boy or girl. Let us keep this in context however of the limitations of the two decisions from last week. Despite the cheery proclamations of the “conservative” media that this was no big deal, in reality the rights to marry whomever one loves or within the religious sphere of desire has now been extended across all cultural and societal aspects of America. If a Muslim wishes to have 4 wives, technically speaking under Kennedy’s majority opinion, how can any court block such a desire or recognition of the ceremony?

Thus one has to ask, under the equal protection clause and other creations expanded by the Supreme Court, how can any Federal or State court block a twenty-five year old man from marrying a thirteen year old girl based on the precepts of Islam or any other religion? Expanding that idea further, what happens when the IRS is used to “acknowledge” and legitimize the “Church of the Fuzzy Apricot” in the Castro District of San Francisco, California and adult males establish as part of their beliefs that marrying young boys is part of their accepted norm?

The Supreme Court based on the standard established by the leftists on the courts which was objected to by the Constitutionalists, especially Justice Scalia, now creates a standard based not on 4000 plus years of Western Civilization for marriage, but instead on feelings and political correctness. To remain consistent, the idea that a non-existent religion creating “religious” standards for marriage must be accepted by the Federal Government and thus by the states. In other words, the rulings against Prop 8 and DOMA did nothing to legitimize gay marriage but instead more to deconstruct thousands of years of civilization and government recognition of marriage to procreate and expand population instead of creating tax breaks to manipulate individual’s net income!

This practice of manipulating human behavior with the tax code has come home to roost. When the first marriage between a thirty-something year old pervert and a boy occurs in your community, do not bitch at us Libertarians. We warned you. America was not ready just yet for the freedoms we believed in and the corruption created by the 16th Amendment and the Progressive perverts who have destroyed our liberties, and by extension, our future.

 

4 Comments on "A Supreme Court Victory for NAMBLA"

  1. GodIsHedonistic | 23/07/2013 at 20:49 |

    You seem to have a distorted sense of libertarianism. When pedophilia becomes legal, it will be thanks to you libertarians. I fail to see how that is bad. Pedophilia occurs naturally in the animal Kingdom, but you wouldn’t be able to internet search that because any article or research that demonstrates this fact is banned. Now, as a libertarian, that should make you outraged! Don’t be such a sheep. Upper society controls this information, and upper society controls. And, on that note, it has actually only been recent that pedophilia (er, well I should say pederastry) has been viewed as “abusive.” Everyone has the potential to be a pedophilia – even you – but it’s either repressed or turned off.

    Now, let’s look at upper society’s “victim” propaganda. The pedophile is not the person who victimizes the child, society is the victimizer. The psychology of being labelled and treated as a victim is what causes the damage. (Exluding penetration of a child under 10 which should be always illegal), a child is told not to let anyone touch them “there,” and when someone does touch them there, they have to live with that. But if it was okay if someone touches them there, then no victimization would occur as can be seen in research and studies of other cultures. But perhaps you haven’t taken the time to do any research about this (which although there is a dearth of research, there are available studies to read). And the “victim” of child molestation grows up to become a pedophile themselves, whether they repress it or know it in the back of their mind. And if they ever act on that, they now have the shame of “abusing” a child, and possibly, legal consequences.

    It really is foolish for people to think that God isn’t hedonistic. God created pedophilia; Man created Taboo.

  2. GodIsHedonistic | 24/07/2013 at 17:51 |

    Oh, yes, I should just add that I’m not a pedophile, but I am actually a hardcore libertarian. I just cannot stand persecution of any group. The world would be a better place if we got rid of the hypocrisy, the corruption, and the wickedness.

    • Two classic responses, but I still believe that it is our duty to protect those incapable of protecting themselves. What you have basically done is validate my position. I could never become a LEO because, as recently happened in our community, a child molester attacked a 5 year old girl. If I were one of the arresting officers, he would have “resisted” arrest and assumed room temperature. As far as your statement alluding to the idea that a true libertarian should not interfere with the age of the individual being pursued for hedonistic pleasure, which is okay according to your post for those over age 10, then that is fine. If you believe that, that is great, have fun. But do not expect me to condone it. Most individuals are not mature enough to make these decisions until after they are at least 16 years of age; then again you’ve probably never lived or worked in the inner city to watch twelve and thirteen year old girls carrying their babies. Your criticism sounds like the defense of pedophilia based on either personal experience or preference because when one states, “I’m not a pedophile,” they usually have some familiarity with that practice. I’ve witnessed the destruction in causes in individual’s lives and if you think its an acceptable practice, go for it. I don’t care. But you disgust me with your support of the issue and anally retentive email address/handle.

  3. GodIsHedonistic | 29/07/2013 at 15:50 |

    Arguendo, let’s just accept that most individuals are not mature enough until they have reached the age of 16. But that means there are individuals mature enough below the age of 16 who are able to make mature decisions. It is very easy for society to ignore pedophilia and incest, but the only reason why it is wrong is because that’s what upper society tells you. But does this stop upper society and your own government from engaging in acts of pedophilia or incest? No. It’s only been recently that upper society came up with the invention that peopel are not mature until 16. Throughout most of human history, over the age of 10 was viewed as mature.

    But your statement about twelve and thriteen year olds walking around inner city streets show me that you have no idea about how libertarianism works. You, in essence, propose that because society is broken no minor should have the right to have sex with an adult. But, is the problem with predators who “exploited” these young girls, or is the problem with society that cannot accomodate for these young girls? I hope, as a libertarian, you are vehemently against capitalism.

    But a 10 year-old who is going to grow up to be a pedophile should have the right to have sex with an adult. Pedophilia is genetic. Why should we persecute people for the way they are born? Now we are going back to the days of slavery. Again, I am not a pedophile, but you implying that I am would be like you implying a slavery abolitionist is actually black. It is abhorrent to society to persecute people for the color of the skin, and it is abhorrent to me (and my God) that society is persecuting people for the way they are born.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: