Jump to content

LadyC

Administrator
  • Content Count

    1,986
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    114

LadyC last won the day on September 3

LadyC had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

199 Excellent

About LadyC

  • Rank
    Politically Incorrect Old Bat

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Texas

Recent Profile Visitors

6,426 profile views
  1. LadyC

    1st cousins

    I read that 2nd article the other day and did a little digging. It's late now but if I remember right, the guy was already in legal trouble and they used this to compound the charges against him or something.
  2. LadyC

    1st cousins

    kc, isn't there a way to bookmark this topic within the forum so i can find it easily ten years from now?
  3. LadyC

    1st cousins

    it's pretty insane since prior to 2005, texas allowed first cousins to marry. they can't go back and charge people who legally married in the state of texas with a crime after the fact. (ex post de facto?) it's also insane because if you'll remember a few years back, sodomy laws were challenged in texas and taken off the books for the simple fact that it was an unconstitutional violation of privacy to legislate was takes place between consenting adults within the privacy of their own home. from an article about the court rulings on lawrence v. texas: (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lawrence-v-Texas) Liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions into a dwelling or other private places. In our tradition the State is not omnipresent in the home. And there are other spheres of our lives and existence, outside the home, where the State should not be a dominant presence. Freedom extends beyond spatial bounds. Liberty presumes an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. The instant case involves liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions. He (Justice Anthony Kennedy) questioned the way in which Justice Byron White, who authored the majority opinion in Bowers, (referencing Bowers v. Hardwick, a 1986 case in Geogia) had framed the central issue of the case—as whether the Constitution “confers a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy”—and asserted that White’s formulation “discloses the Court’s own failure to appreciate the extent of the liberty at stake.” The very wording “demeans the claim of the individual put forward, just as it would demean a married couple were it to be said marriage is simply about the right to have sexual intercourse,” he wrote. (clarification and emphasis mine) It seems to me that any cousin couple who are legally wed either in texas prior to 2005, or in another state where such marriage is recognized as legal, could find some attorney that is smart enough to use the Lawrence V. Texas case as precedent, since the US Supreme Court ruled that texas could not invade the privacy of a couple in their bedroom. now... let's move on to the actual statutes in texas. i must point out that i am NOT an attorney and that any commentary i provide on the following is just my personal uneducated grasp of what it's trying to say. i'll put my commentary in red. the entire family code can be found at https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/SDocs/FAMILYCODE.pdf SUBCHAPTER B. PUBLIC POLICY Sec. 1.101. EVERY MARRIAGE PRESUMED VALID. In order to promote the public health and welfare and to provide the necessary records, this code specifies detailed rules to be followed in establishing the marriage relationship. However, in order to provide stability for those entering into the marriage relationship in good faith and to provide for an orderly determination of parentage and security for the children of the relationship, it is the policy of this state to preserve and uphold each marriage against claims of invalidity unless a strong reason exists for holding the marriage void or voidable. Therefore, every marriage entered into in this state is presumed to Statute text rendered on: 9/7/2018 - 1 - be valid unless expressly made void by Chapter 6 or unless expressly made voidable by Chapter 6 and annulled as provided by that chapter. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Sec. 1.103. PERSONS MARRIED ELSEWHERE. The law of this state applies to persons married elsewhere who are domiciled in this state. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. (this little clause is what concerns me. now let's go to chapter 6.) SUBCHAPTER C. DECLARING A MARRIAGE VOID Sec. 6.201. CONSANGUINITY. A marriage is void if one party to the marriage is related to the other as: (1) an ancestor or descendant, by blood or adoption; (2) a brother or sister, of the whole or half blood or by adoption; (3) a parent's brother or sister, of the whole or half blood or by adoption; or (4) a son or daughter of a brother or sister, of the whole or half blood or by adoption. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. (so as we know, cousins can not marry. Sec. 6.307. JURISDICTION TO DECLARE MARRIAGE VOID. (a) Either party to a marriage made void by this chapter may sue to have the marriage declared void, or the court may declare the marriage void in a collateral proceeding. (b) The court may declare a marriage void only if: (1) the purported marriage was contracted in this state; or (2) either party is domiciled in this state. (c) A suit to have a marriage declared void is a suit in rem, affecting the status of the parties to the purported marriage. Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. (now maybe i'm wrong, but it sounds to me as though the state of texas is required to acknowledge as valid any marriage that (at least legally) took place somewhere else, assuming the couple did not live in texas at the time they married elsewhere.) (i emphasised what is in bold.) So... MY understanding (which is worthless in the big scheme of things) is that a couple who resided and married where cousins could legally marry are safe from being declared void by the state of texas. and it is also my understanding (also worthless in the big scheme of things) is that a judge can not peer into the private bedroom of a couple and declare their sexual conduct as illegal because that was fought (in the US supreme court) in lawrence v. texas. at the very least, if any couple ever faces legal action in texas for having sex with the cousin they are married to (or living with, since there is another whole section on the validity of common law marriage), find a lawyer who will be willing to dissect all of the above in front of a judge, and who is willing to take it all the way to the supreme court if necessary. i honestly don't see texas ever reversing it's relatively recent ban on cousin marriage UNLESS it is challenged in the court.
  4. well, not entirely offline, but off cc anyway. i'll be making a road trip north to visit my youngest and her family. see ya in august!
  5. not yet. when does it throw the error? when viewing? posting? quoting?
  6. LadyC

    Favorite browser addons?

    avira web safety, which blocks ads and trackers, and copymethat, which allows me to copy any recipe from any website, including blogs. i also use Grammarly.
  7. LadyC

    Help support our advertisers :)

    oh! so i do! sorry, guess it works!
  8. LadyC

    Help support our advertisers :)

    i don't see any ads.... what are you smoking, boss?
  9. LadyC

    What do you guys do to have fun

    you go girl!! i hope you win!
  10. LadyC

    Catholic marriage

    that is awesome!
  11. LadyC

    Introduction/My story

    LOL i remember when Mark and I were first dating people would say "are you from arkansas or something?" and i'd laugh and say no, it's not legal there. we're texans, by the way. and at the time even first cousins could marry here. six years later the law changed. it wouldn't have effected us anyway, because we're first cousins once removed.
  12. ok, you asked me to read this, and i have. and there are a couple of things here... first off, the cultural perceptions may have a lot to do with this. you're in different countries, but you give any clues as to where. if it's anywhere in western civilization, the cultural perceptions are going to be the same... doesn't matter if you're talking about australia or canada or europe or america, it's the same. but there are some cultures in the middle east that have much more positive views of cousin marriage, and then there are asian cultures that have a very dim view of cousins. if she's from an asian culture, you're unlikely to ever convince her. what exactly is it that she thinks is wrong about it? is it a genetic concern? a moral/biblical concern? or is it just the "what others will say" kind of thing? it might be that the only way to convince her is to enlist the aid of someone in the family to the case in favor of the two of you. i know, nobody knows. but you said you think many family members suspect but are not saying anything to avoid a mess. let me tell ya something. if you think they suspect, then they KNOW. and if they're not saying anything about it, it is NOT to avoid a mess. they're just respecting your privacy. seriously, people who suspect things like this and disapprove aren't going to give a second's thought to how messy it will get if THEY confront you. they're going to be in way too big a rush to get all in your face to tell you what a mess YOU are making. that's just human nature. so you need to go to one of those who suspect that you trust and admire, and that you know SHE will trust, and tell them what's going on. because it sounds to me like the only "wrong" your cousin is seeing is through what she thinks is the eyes of people she's afraid to lose. and if she can get the assurance that they aren't going to judge her, then maybe she'll start to see your relationship as right.
  13. LadyC

    Whycousins?

    cadbury, if he is here, i hope the two of you can talk. but i feel sad that you consider it a mark of immaturity that he might want to talk to someone else (in real life) about his feelings for you. i don't know what the context of what he may have said to someone about you, but unless he was making fun of you, it's sad that you would feel disrespected by him. however, i'd be furious at the person he confided in who couldn't be trusted with the secret. imagine how your cousin must have felt. he confided in someone and that person betrayed him, and gossiped about him, and even worse, gossiped about the girl he cares for (you)... he discovered how untrustworthy and immature his friend was. it's so easy to understand why cousins (who feel romantic attraction) can't trust each other enough to take that leap of faith. it's the same fear of rejection that occurs in non-cousin crushes too... only amplified by a thousand potential complications that could ostracize one from every family member and friend that gets wind of it. surely you understand this, because if you'd taken that leap of faith yourself, you wouldn't be here. i hope he reads this, and the two of you can take that leap and answer all those burning questions that each of you have.
  14. LadyC

    Arrested Development

    never seen it. but i'm not a fan of anything netflix touches, production-wise. they substitute foul language, sex scenes and cheesy cliches for quality story-telling and script-writing. they even ruined my beloved longmire. except lost in space. that one's good. (so far.)
  15. i won't tell anybody anything different LOL.
×