Governor Steve Beshear

Governor Steve Beshear…. (Interesting…. My spell check wanted to turn Beshear into besmear or bear smear… irony? I think not.) *shakes her head in shock without awe* I have seen some stupid in my life time.. but this guy… top 10… he’s WEAPONS GRADE STUPID!

I know this news story broke a few days ago…. I just can NOT manage to shake off the quantity of stupid, and really need to say something about it. I tried, kids… I really did… I epically failed at keeping my big mouth shut. Ahhh the beauty of FREE SPEECH!

First things first, read the actual LEGAL DOCUMENT here… yes, folks, he really is THAT stupid….

Ok so… Let’s pick a part some of the moronic things stated in the brief shall we?

  • “legitimate interest of fostering natural procreation through a traditional marriage model.”
  • “Procreation is vital to continuation of the human race, and only man-woman couples can naturally procreate,” the lawyers argued. The ability to produce offspring, they said, provides “long-term economic stability through stable birth rates.”
  • “Same-sex couples are materially different from traditional man-woman couples,”
  • “Only man-woman couples can naturally procreate. Fostering procreation serves a legitimate economic interest that is rationally related to the traditional man-woman marriage model. Thus, same-sex couples are not similarly situated to man-woman couples, and the distinction drawn by Kentucky’s statutes is rationally related to a legitimate interest of Kentucky.”

I am going to quote Silas House’s findings here on just how “baby short” the state of Kentucky is.

“a state where 65 percent of women are fertile, according to state vital statistics; a state that has the seventh-highest teenage birthrate in the nation, according to the Office of Adolescent Health; a place where 83 percent of those teen pregnancies happen outside of “man-woman” marriage.”

Ahem… when you look at the numbers quoted by Mr. House, makes you wonder if Sir Governor is doing that Al Gore fuzzy math…

What about the men and women who cannot have children? Are they not allowed to marry? According to Gov Beshear, you people should be getting divorced this very instant! Also by this statement, if you are a woman who is pre or post-menopausal… you have no reason to be married anymore, here’s your paperwork! Oh, wait… you married because you love your spouse? Please… that’s irrelevant… Marriage is ONLY for procreation.

As I read those lines, I thought to myself that he did have the intelligence at least to not step on Separation of church and state. He skirted it, he climbed on that line and dry humped it; but he didn’t break it. What a shame… I do enjoy a good fire blast vs people who trip over that line and get smacked in the face with it. I am a very devote Constitutional-est, as most know. But not to worry, as I read more, I began to get my warm fuzzy happy feeling back. He left me SO MUCH MORE chronic moronic spew to slap him around with.

I am tossing this in, I know the difference between Federal and State, I do want to be clear on that.

The recognition of civil marriages is central to state domestic relations law applicable to residents and citizens. See Williams v. North Carolina , 317 U.S. 287, 63 S.Ct. 207, 87 L.Ed. 279 (1942) (“Each state as a sovereign has a rightful and legitimate concern in the marital status of person s domiciled within its borders.”)
The definition of marriage is the foundation of the State’s broader authority to regulate the subject of domestic relations with respect to the “[p]rotection of
offspring, property interests, and the enforcement of marital responsibilities.” Ibid.
“[T]he state, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, possessed full power over the subject of marriage and divorce . . . [and] the Constitution delegated no authority to the Government of the United States on the subject of marriage and divorce.” Haddock v. Haddock , 201 U.S. 562, 575, 26 S.Ct. 525, 50 L.Ed. 867 (1906); see also In re Burrus , 136 U.S. 586, 593-594, 10 S.Ct. 850, 34 L.Ed. 500 (1890)

Please notice the dates on those…. 1890, 1942, 1906… Not to mention locations… I believe those were created to prevent interracial marriages… more about that below.

Oh… they tried to bring the Constitution in… EPIC FAIL!

“constitutional guarantee of a right to same-sex marriage” and wanting one is “recognition of a new right”

There is NOTHING about same sex marriage in any of our country’s documents. I will give them that. However, there is NOTHING against it either. Marriage is not even listed as a right anywhere in our country’s founding documents. So logically, how does that make the “recognition of a new right”? It’s not a right in the first place. Again, more of Al Gore’s fuzzy math going on here… 1 + 1 = 2, but 0 + 0 = nothing what so ever relevant to the epic fail spew using our Constitution.

As we continue on, I would like to point out the YEARS this spew was pulled up from…

Skinner v. State of Okl. ex rel. Williamson,316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942) (finding that “marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race”)

And yet abortions are legal TODAY… that negates that whole finding… Last I looked, this was 2014, not 1942, not to mention BIRTH CONTROL!!!

Maynard v. Hill , 125 U.S. 190, 211 (1888) (characterizing marriage as “the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress”);

Again, this is 2014, not 1888… This was taken from a time where divorce wasn’t really an option. By today’s standards, how many divorces are filed in a minute around the world? It’s common place to have been divorced, not really a stable foundation anymore is it?

Again the top two were quoted and this came in…

In this way, this case is different from Loving v. Virginia , 388 U.S. 1 (1967), and the analogy between race and gender with regard to marriage fails.
Virginia’s miscegenation laws prohibited marriages between couples of mixed races. The Supreme Court correctly concluded that race had no bearing upon any legitimate interest of the government with regard to marriage and that the laws violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

Really? No one in this country has the right to decide who anyone wants to marry or who they fall in love with… I don’t care if they are black, white, purple, what their orientation is, what their religion is… I think this next quote says it all… nuff said on that!

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

As I mentioned above preventing interracial marriages wasn’t included in any of Amendment 14’s clauses, matter of a fact, I haven’t found anything about marriage in any of those clauses. If I am missing it somewhere, point it out to me in the comments section below. Make sure it’s a valid source, and if you were thinking about throwing Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) at me, I am gonna remind you that was thrown out LAWRENCE V. TEXAS (02-102) 539 U.S. 558 (2003) 🙂

Moving on… I highly doubt that the State of Kentucky gives out incentives to pop out babies like Japan does… Irrelevant to this case in my not so humble opinon…

The Commonwealth has an economic interest in procreation. Only man-woman couples have the ability to naturally procreate. Whether or not same-sex couples may capably raise children in a loving environment or engage in loving relationships has no bearing on the Commonwealth’s legitimate interest of fostering natural procreation through a traditional marriage model.

So… what about all the children waiting to be adopted? Doesn’t the state make money off of that? Isn’t an adoption helping the procreation economical interests? Considering the States teen mother syndrome, I would think that is more of a hardship then a married gay couple adopting a child or two. Less children the State has to pay for annually, welfare or state warded children.

Do you want to know what else is a drain on economical interests? Morons who spend tax payers money to file spew like this Brief, not to mention the legal team, the salaries of all the people involved.. (paralegals who spend over time hours to find all these outdated cases just to name one example).

So here’s to you, Governor Steve Beshear, you antiquity, bigoted, tax payer money waster… your award. I really think you could find a more worth while cause to spend your State’s tax payers dollars then this…


Chronically Moronic, Perpetually Stunned Award
Chronically Moronic, Perpetually Stunned Award
Bri K is a mom and grandmother, enjoying the next chapter of her life on the mission of leveling up after 50! Bri doesn't believe that once you hit a certain age or become a grandmother, your likes, hobbies, or lifestyle have to change. "You don't stop living because your kids grew up!"

One Thought on “Governor Steve Beshear, An Unnecessary Antiquity”

  • Great article. I read the document, I was stunned there are still those out there that feel marriage sole purpose is for procreation.

Join the conversation!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.