Scarecrow
Member
I have offered to testify at the Loy Nielsen trial in Texas. I contacted Kent Schaffer, the lead attorney defending Mr. Nielsen and offered to testify:
"Kent Schaffer <kentschaffer@gmail.com>
Dear Kent;
Thank you for continuing to receive my communications and taking a moment to consider them.
I have sent you many links and attached documents that I hope will help you make your case more effective, what I haven't told you is my own story.
When my wife and I discussed children I told her I would rather not have any, or have at least 6. After our third child she had a tubal pregnancy and did not get pregnant after that. She has not had her period for two years now, and will not have any more children.
I am left with two alternatives if I want to have more children since I do not want to adopt:
1) "Cheat" on my wife and have "bastard" children with another woman and remain married to my first wife (she does not want a divorce).
2) Divorce my wife and marry another woman so that I have the opportunity to have more "legal" children.
Because of our laws I seemingly have no alternative but to "legally" divorce my wife to remove the government restrictions which prevent me from "legally" fathering children with another woman. Ironically I could have as many mistresses and father children with them with impunity as long as I help to support them (how sick is that?).
I say "legally" because I believe there is a separate and distinct difference between a state issued dog tag (license) for my wife and a covenant entered into between a man and a woman before God as our witness.
Malachi 2:14 But you say, "Why does he not?" Because the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.
Galatians 3:15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified.
I see the license as nothing more than a government intrusion into my private life. To me a license is an attempt by the state to usurp the authority of God and control my marriage. If you read a license you will see that you sign over this authority to the state when you sign the license. Is marriage a natural law rather than a positive law?
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1753
I guess the underlying question is why am I not free to practice my religion and take an additional wife so I can have more children when the 1st amendment clearly states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1842
Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the Congress. However, starting with Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925), the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the First Amendment to each state, including any local government.
Should there ever come a day that the state simply registers civil unions between individuals, as requested by the individuals involved, I will be elated. In the likely event that you obtain a decision in your favor overturning the bigamy laws (although it may take an appeal or two to achieve this) I will use that victory to challenge the laws in my own state of Colorado in an attempt to legally marry another wife for the purpose of having more children.
And yes, you may use my story in your arguments, and I would even be willing to tell this story to a Judge and Jury if need be."
I have not been contacted by Kent about testifying, and I don't know if I ever will. My purpose in posting this information is to hear your thoughts and read any suggestions you may have for me in the event that I am called to testify to my circumstances to bolster the case.
"Kent Schaffer <kentschaffer@gmail.com>
Dear Kent;
Thank you for continuing to receive my communications and taking a moment to consider them.
I have sent you many links and attached documents that I hope will help you make your case more effective, what I haven't told you is my own story.
When my wife and I discussed children I told her I would rather not have any, or have at least 6. After our third child she had a tubal pregnancy and did not get pregnant after that. She has not had her period for two years now, and will not have any more children.
I am left with two alternatives if I want to have more children since I do not want to adopt:
1) "Cheat" on my wife and have "bastard" children with another woman and remain married to my first wife (she does not want a divorce).
2) Divorce my wife and marry another woman so that I have the opportunity to have more "legal" children.
Because of our laws I seemingly have no alternative but to "legally" divorce my wife to remove the government restrictions which prevent me from "legally" fathering children with another woman. Ironically I could have as many mistresses and father children with them with impunity as long as I help to support them (how sick is that?).
I say "legally" because I believe there is a separate and distinct difference between a state issued dog tag (license) for my wife and a covenant entered into between a man and a woman before God as our witness.
Malachi 2:14 But you say, "Why does he not?" Because the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.
Galatians 3:15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified.
I see the license as nothing more than a government intrusion into my private life. To me a license is an attempt by the state to usurp the authority of God and control my marriage. If you read a license you will see that you sign over this authority to the state when you sign the license. Is marriage a natural law rather than a positive law?
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1753
I guess the underlying question is why am I not free to practice my religion and take an additional wife so I can have more children when the 1st amendment clearly states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1842
Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the Congress. However, starting with Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925), the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the First Amendment to each state, including any local government.
Should there ever come a day that the state simply registers civil unions between individuals, as requested by the individuals involved, I will be elated. In the likely event that you obtain a decision in your favor overturning the bigamy laws (although it may take an appeal or two to achieve this) I will use that victory to challenge the laws in my own state of Colorado in an attempt to legally marry another wife for the purpose of having more children.
And yes, you may use my story in your arguments, and I would even be willing to tell this story to a Judge and Jury if need be."
I have not been contacted by Kent about testifying, and I don't know if I ever will. My purpose in posting this information is to hear your thoughts and read any suggestions you may have for me in the event that I am called to testify to my circumstances to bolster the case.
