The latest brand of LGBTQ perversion, the suit calls it a matter of “individual autonomy” for a person to marry a family member. The state, it adds, should not have a say one way or another.
“Through the enduring bond of marriage, two persons, whatever relationship they might otherwise have with one another, can find a greater level of expression, intimacy and spirituality,” the parent argues in the claim, which was filed in the Manhattan Federal Court on April 1.
Following the “love is love” trend pushed by the Cult of LGBTQ, the suit’s arguments center around the idea that anything consensual should be legal, even if it defies all moral standards of decency.
Even though potential offspring from the couple could end up deformed or brain-damaged, the plaintiff says he or she has a right to “live his truth” (or her truth) without interference.
“The proposed spouses are adults,” the suit explains in defense. “The proposed spouses are biological parent and child. The proposed spouses are unable to procreate together.”
Whether this means one or the other person is too old to have kids or both are the same gender remains unclear. Regardless, the suit identifies the couple as being members of the “PAACNP” stripe of the LGBTQ flag – PAACNP standing for “Parent and Adult Child Non-Procreationable.”
“Parent-and-adult-child couples for whom procreation is either virtually or literally impossible can aspire to the transcendent purposes of marriage and seek fulfillment in its highest meaning,” the suit further argues.
In typical LGBTQ form, the suit goes on to victimize the couple for not having the same “rights” as normal couples. It claims that not allowing the two family members to marry will “diminish their humanity.”
Is there any limit to LGBTQ perversion?
As it turns out, this attempt to add incest to the LGBTQ “rainbow” flag has been part of the agenda for years. LifeSiteNews writer Michael L. Brown has been documenting it for years.
Back in 2012, the media was pushing the notion of “Genetic Sexual Attraction,” or GSA. Two years later, a judge in Australia affirmed this concept as valid. The year after that, a homosexual politician in Ireland publicly argued for legalized incest.
As far back as 2007, The New York Times was pushing for legalized incest, lumping it in the same category as same-sex marriage. Though the nation at large is far from agreeing with this sentiment, the cultural re-shapers are desperately trying nonetheless.
“So, again, sadly and tragically, all this is nothing new,” Brown laments. “The slippery slope is very real.”
Brown adds that if marriage itself could be so radically redefined as to remove the requirement of one man and one woman, then there is no limit to the number of marriage configurations that could end up becoming the eventual norm.
Amazingly, Brown was one of only five participants in a written debate that was held back in 2014 who supported keeping adult incest illegal. Two of the participants said they did not support the idea of consensual adult incest, but argued that the government has no right to interfere.
The other two, however, operated from the “love is love” principle that is now widely prevalent in the LGBTQ community, which supports no limits to sexual promiscuity and perversion.
“What kind of horrific upbringing results in someone wanting to marry their own parent?” asked one commenter at LifeSiteNews.
“It would be fantastic if this was just a farce to bring to light how absurd things have gotten. But I hold out no such hope in these days.”
More related news about the Cult of LGBTQ can be found at Evil.news.
Sources for this article include: