Page 2 of 37 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 367

Thread: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

  1. #11
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,299
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    You don't get to deny homosexuals rights because of the possible ripple effects. Fight for or against an issue based on its merits and its merits alone. One could also point to interracial marriage as a stepping stone for both of the aforementioned battles occurring presently. That does not in any way diminish the validity of that particular position.
    This is not a ripple effect ruling from SSM anyway. The ruling was based on a case against sodomy laws, not marriage laws. Basically the ruling states that there is a limit to just how intrusive the government can be in private, personal matters. Marriage is a state, public institution in that you need a license to be considered legally married(among other things) and receive a whole mess of legal rights and responsibilities from marriage. This ruling does not bring us closer to state licensed polygamy.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #12
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    This is not a ripple effect ruling from SSM anyway. The ruling was based on a case against sodomy laws, not marriage laws. Basically the ruling states that there is a limit to just how intrusive the government can be in private, personal matters. Marriage is a state, public institution in that you need a license to be considered legally married(among other things) and receive a whole mess of legal rights and responsibilities from marriage. This ruling does not bring us closer to state licensed polygamy.
    Thanks for that. I was basing my comment strictly off positions that the OP referenced.

  3. #13
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,277

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    The only issue I have with polygamy is that the laws set up by the Federal and state governments to handle marriages don't deal with polygamy at all, for example if a man is married to two when and one wishes to divorce him how is that handled? Also tax laws which have different rules/benefits for married couples don't work with polygamy either. But if Utah were to change its laws to add text to deal with such issues, fine go ahead by all means.

    Aside from that if these people are simply getting married in their churches, ie marriages not recognized by the state, and then living together to raise a family, I got no problem whatsoever so long as the children can be taken care up which is where already existing organizations like child services comes into play.

    Only if it were one of those polygamy communities which drive out males to deal with the male/female imbalance or otherwise verges on cult like control of its members, only then would I support the law getting into their lives.
    Guess they'll have rewrite them all now.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #14
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    42,882

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Under Waddoups' ruling, bigamy remains illegal in Utah only in the literal sense, such as when someone fraudulently acquires more than one marriage license.
    So in other words, it's like EVERY OTHER STATE IN THE UNION.

    There is no law against polyamory ... only bigamy. You can't legally marry more than one person at a time. Nothing has changed, except for Utah's antiquated statute.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Guess they'll have rewrite them all now.
    No you wouldn't because polygamy could not be governed by the same laws as marriage between two individuals, its a simple matter of treating a marriage between a man and a woman the same as one between two men for all legal concerns. But I think it would be better served if new laws came out since at least 3 people are now involved instead of just two. You would need new laws, not rewritten laws.

    Also, whats wrong with rewriting the law?

  6. #16
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,928
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    I would like to say that while I did not agree with DOMA, many users on this website predicted this exact situation would happen as a result. The gay community is winning victory after victory in the same sex marriage realm. However, every action has a reaction. This, I believe, is a reaction to that. This judge really has no precedent anymore to rule against polygamy. Nor does any other Federal judge really.
    Polygamy advocate groups hail judge's ruling in Utah | Fox News
    Call it the law of unintended consequences or if you must, for ever action there is a reaction. I have no problems with either gay marriage or polygamy. I believe government has no place in saying who can or can't be married. DOMA was wrong and so to is limiting how many wives or husbands one can have.

    The only reason I see why government ever became involved is marriage is used for tax purposes. Heck it was until 1916 that Kentucky became the last state in the union to start keeping records on marriages. Before then it was a church responsibility or just writing it down in a family bible or something like that. Being it is no longer a crime is a step in the right direction.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  7. #17
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,277

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    No you wouldn't because polygamy could not be governed by the same laws as marriage between two individuals, its a simple matter of treating a marriage between a man and a woman the same as one between two men for all legal concerns. But I think it would be better served if new laws came out since at least 3 people are now involved instead of just two. You would need new laws, not rewritten laws.

    Also, whats wrong with rewriting the law?
    You're putting words in my mouth.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  8. #18
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,343

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Call it the law of unintended consequences or if you must, for ever action there is a reaction. I have no problems with either gay marriage or polygamy. I believe government has no place in saying who can or can't be married. DOMA was wrong and so to is limiting how many wives or husbands one can have.

    The only reason I see why government ever became involved is marriage is used for tax purposes. Heck it was until 1916 that Kentucky became the last state in the union to start keeping records on marriages. Before then it was a church responsibility or just writing it down in a family bible or something like that. Being it is no longer a crime is a step in the right direction.
    Good morning, Pero.

    If polygamy is ever legalized, are we supposed to have a wish list ready? :

  9. #19
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Gotta read past the headline dude. The ruling was about cohabitation laws, not marriage.
    The cohabitation laws were meant to thwart the "common law" aspect of having second and third (etc) wives.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  10. #20
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,775

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    You're putting words in my mouth.
    Really gets annoying when people try to tell you what you believe, doesn't it?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 2 of 37 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •