Franklin Kameny, Ph.D., founder of Washington, D.C.’s pioneer homosexual activist organization, the Mattachine Society, is known as the father of gay activist militancy.

He has now written his advocacy of legal marriage of sadists with masochists.

Kameny sent an e-mail in response to my WorldNetDaily column headlined: “Cheney’s ‘anything goes’ shocker,” in which I wrote:

“What if Mr. One-Heartbeat-Away in the White House had a daughter who was a masochist who fell in love with a sadist? (And she loved being beaten, as much as her lover enjoyed beating her.)

“Would Mr. Cheney have announced in Davenport his support of weddings with leather dresses, whips and chains?”

Kameny’s e-mail opened with his assurance that both sadism and masochisms are to him repellant. But he added the following:

“If a sadist and a masochist wish to marry, on that disclosed basis, what possible rationale is there for prohibiting such a marriage? There is none.”

Citing the Declaration of Independence as “our country’s birth certificate,” he noted:

“In that Declaration, we find the guarantee, nor merely as a right, but as an inalienable [sic] right, of the ‘pursuit of happiness.’ So, if an American sadist and a masochist – or two men or two women – choose to pursue their happiness by marrying, their right so to do is guaranteed in the very essence of what our nation stands for.”

Consider that, ladies and gentlemen. The very essence of what our nation stands for includes marriage licenses for sadists who love-beat their masochist spouses – who love being beaten!

Is there any evidence that any of those who wrote and voted for either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution ever, in any way imagined that their designation of the pursuit of happiness should be interpreted as meaning marriage licenses for sadomasochists? Or for sodomists?

In almost complete contradiction of his pursuit of happiness allowing sadomasochist marriage, Dr. Kameny adds the following:

“Obviously, some forms of happiness-pursuit can be validly limited or prohibited.”

But his e-mail has no stipulation whatsoever of that he deems to be a valid happiness-pursuing prohibition.

If sodomists and sadomasochists should be allowed to obtain marriage licenses, what other happiness-pursuers should be denied?

In France, there was recent news of the government allowing a woman to marry her deceased lover (who was buried).

Why should American necrophiliacs be prohibited by law from engaging in their “pursuit of happiness” with corpses, as well as being denied the right to marry the corpse?

There are no records of necrophiliacs spreading AIDS, as promiscuous male homosexuals do.

Nor is there any AIDS-spreading record of those whose “pursuit of happiness” involves them with freely consenting beasts. (Consent need not involve either written or oral – but availability, rather than running away.)

But Kameny concludes his e-mail by affirming:

“No persuasive or credible justification or proof has been presented for limiting or forbidding marriages between sadists and masochists, or between two men or two women. Therefore such couples have the right to have their marriages formally and legally recognized by what are THEIR governments also.”

Marriage licenses for sadomasochists.

It’s interesting, however appalling, to see what’s next on the agenda of the Sodomy Lobby.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.