SCOTUS RULED IN 1972: ABERROSEXUAL SO-CALLED “MARRIAGE” NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT! WHAT PART DON’T EXTREMISTS UNDERSTAND?

In 1971, the Minnesota Supreme Court became one of the first in the United States to rule on the issue of aberrosexual so-called “marriage.”  In Baker v. Nelson (291 Minn. 310, 191 N.W.2d 185), the Court held that the Minnesota law prohibiting marriage between individuals of the same sex did not violate the constitution and therefore must be upheld.  The case was appealed all the way up to the United States Supreme Court which dismissed the case for “want of a substantial federal question”, establishing the legal precedent which exists to this day that individuals of the same sex do not have the right to “marry.”

The U.S. Supreme Court already ruled there is no constitutional right to same-sex so-called ‘marriage’ —in 1972! The case, Baker v. Nelson, is the very first case in which anyone ever asserted that the Constitution of the United States grants the right to legally “marry” a person of the same sex.

Baker v. Nelson began when two aberrosexuals, Richard John Baker and James Michael McConnell, applied for a marriage license in May 1970 with a court clerk in Minneapolis, named Gerald R. Nelson. The two aberrosexuals were refused the license because Minnesota law defined Marriage as a union of “persons of the opposite sex.”

A Circuit Court agreed with the clerk and specifically barred the issuance of such a license, leading the two aberrosexuals to appeal the decision. On October 15, 1971, the Supreme Court of Minnesota ruled that the state’s Marriage law did not permit same-sex individuals to “marry,” and that this “does not offend … the United States Constitution.” Minnesota’s highest court pointed out that Marriage “is a union of man and woman” and is an institution “as old as the book of Genesis.”

The case was appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court — which at the time, was required to accept all such appeals (this is no longer true). The Supreme Court ruled on the case on October 10, 1972, declaring (in full): “Appeal from Sup. Ct. Minn. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.”

So what part of “no” do extremists not understand? What makes them think they can call their sexual behavioral choices a “right,” then file sham lawsuits seeking to impose this lunacy on everyone else?

---

FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE
LIGA DEMÓCRATA DE LA FLORIDA 
POB 350751, Miami, FL 33135
DemocraticLeague@aol.com

 

COPYRIGHT © 2019 FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC LEAGUE, INC.