Download | Duration: 00:14:34

  There is evidence of Cognitive Corruption in the California Courts as a judge tries to create law out of thin, yet reprobate, air in KAREN L. STRAUSS, et al., Petitioners v. MARK B. HORTON, et al., (S168047).  The law inherited by us from the founding of this nation has elements of many sorts of systems of law framed by men, as well as the law revealed to us by the Creator through nature and by direct revelation recorded in the Holy Bible.  Never did the civil law, by which California and United States law is framed, address marriage any way other than one husband - being married to one wife - at one time.  Even incestuous marriages, because they were indeed one man with one woman at one time, were not considered void ab initio but were merely voidable under civil law dependant upon whether pains were taken to have the marriages declared void as far as "civil law" was concerned.  Anything that was 'one man' and 'one woman' in contract as husband and wife at 'one time' was presumed a marriage.  Yet any claim for one man or woman to be married to a woman or man respectively while at the same time being married to another woman or man (again respectively), the second claim of marriage was considered in "civil law" to be indeed void ab initio.  In civil law, there could never be anything other than one man and one woman in contract of marriage together at one time.

The U.S. Constitution and many state constitutions preserve to the people those rights not enumerated in the constitution.  Never has it been in the history of creation to be a "right", civil or otherwise, to have two men be a husband and wife to each other, or two women in the same way.  When researching the 'rights not enumerated', they can be found in great part by reading Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (circa 1766).  To find anything about the right or wrong of two men or two women engaging in conduct related to the 'marriage' bed, you do not find it in the discussion commentaries relating to husband and wife.  You instead find it in the commentaries relating to crimes.  There, it describes the conduct as the crime against nature and says that it is not fit to be named.  The writer took pains to shorten his commentary so the subject could be least discussed out of discust for the heinousness of the act.  In the same discussion, man's physical act with a beast was included as the crime against nature on par. 

Somebody needs to send some California lawyers, aparently even the Attorney General, back to law school.  Otherwise, the next California Court will declare it unfair to refuse a man to be declared by civil law to be married to his managerie. 

The audio file is recording of the closing segment of David Alan Carmichael standing in as guest host on the Truth Attack radio show in West-Central Florida on August 6, 2010.