Just in case you were wondering whether some folks are serious about social conservatism (CNN):
BLACK JACK, Missouri (AP) — The City Council has rejected a measure allowing unmarried couples with multiple children to live together, and the mayor said those who fall into that category could soon face eviction.
Olivia Shelltrack and Fondrey Loving were denied an occupancy permit after moving into a home in this St. Louis suburb because they have three children and are not married.
Polimom knows people who have been “a couple” for decades… but for various reasons, declined to take the traditional walk down the aisle. I keep trying to imagine them unable to live together as a family because of a City Council ordinance.
I find this astonishing, frankly, but I’m curious what you think.
Is marriage a civil institution? A legal designation? Or is it a religious commitment? And would any of those justify what Black Jack, Missouri is doing?
Marriage is a legal contract. And a civil institution. And (sometimes) a religious commitment. These are all different things, and the mixup is precisely what’s given us the vacuous “gay marriage debate.”
Maybe the people of Black Jack realized that they’re so weak and spineless that without a threat, they can’t possibly do what they think is right?
I find the application of the ordinance intriguing. I moved in with my partner when I was pregnant, at which point I could have legally lived in Black Jack if I so desired. We had a child, which sounds as though it is still legal because it is not “multiple children.” I could conceivably have lived there until the end of my second pregnancy…at which point I would have been evicted with my 20 month old and my newborn??? What I find very intriguing is that my own mother also had a hard time accepting the second pregnancy, because “the first one could have been a mistake, but when you have another…” I never did figure out why it was preferrable to assume that I had mistakenly conceived my daughter than accept the fact that she was conceived in love, as was her brother, albeit out of matrimony. But, it sounds like Black Jack understands that line of thought!
The city is mainly trying to keep a tight lid on the number of unrelated people living together. This particular situation deals with “couples” and could be the current focus of the city council, but it is not uncommon for cities to take up enforcing the issue. Often it is used to shift student housing out of certain neighborhoods, but it is also enforced broadly to discourage overcrowding or perceived overcrowding of housing as it may relate to noise complaints. The US Supreme Court has upheld the right of cities to regulate “single family housing” in an effort to control quality. But anytime it comes up in the news, there are instances of people where their situation would not otherwise be a problem.
In Texas, it is up to the home owner as to how long they want to have “visitors” at their house, so that can kind of be used to work around the wording. But it would still hinder the number of people that can sign lease contracts, etc.