Page 30 of 37 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 367

Thread: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

  1. #291
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,494

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by iacardsfan View Post
    Can somebody explain the big deal with his ruling to me?
    In Utah it was illegal for a married to people to co-habitate with people who were not their spouses and tell people they are married. A judge ruled that law unconstitutional. You still cannot be legally married to more than one person in Utah so in truth this ruling has nothing to do with polygamy.

    I do wonder about a couple of things. Co-habitate doesn't necessarily imply a sexual relationship (though the Utah law may define the term). I wonder if a married couple taking in a keep it non-sexual relationship would violate the Utah law.

    I also wonder, if the Utah law is meant to deal with sexual relationships, what that does to the still existing adultery law. Half the states still technically outlaw adultery.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  2. #292
    Professor
    iacardsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 09:51 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    In Utah it was illegal for a married to people to co-habitate with people who were not their spouses and tell people they are married. A judge ruled that law unconstitutional. You still cannot be legally married to more than one person in Utah so in truth this ruling has nothing to do with polygamy.

    I do wonder about a couple of things. Co-habitate doesn't necessarily imply a sexual relationship (though the Utah law may define the term). I wonder if a married couple taking in a keep it non-sexual relationship would violate the Utah law.

    I also wonder, if the Utah law is meant to deal with sexual relationships, what that does to the still existing adultery law. Half the states still technically outlaw adultery.
    I understand the ruling. I was being more rhetorical than anything.
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
    - Mark Twain
    Run your own nation, play Cybernations.

  3. #293
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by iacardsfan View Post
    I understand the ruling. I was being more rhetorical than anything.
    Rhetorical sometimes dosen't come across very well.

    The the "[/SARCASM]" tag next time.



    >>>>

  4. #294
    Professor
    iacardsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 09:51 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Rhetorical sometimes dosen't come across very well.

    The the "[/SARCASM]" tag next time.


    >>>>
    will do
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
    - Mark Twain
    Run your own nation, play Cybernations.

  5. #295
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    Since the traditional definition has been forever changed, redefining marriage has become a slippery slope. Laws have consequences. You don't care for how I expressed those views trying to show the reality that a slippery slope exists? Tough cookies.
    Correction: the definition has been forever changing. Polygamy is an historical fact, both as polygyny and polyandry. Incest marriages are a historical fact. Same sex marriages are a historical fact. For that matter ghost marriages (marrying a live person to a deceased person) area a historical fact. Your views are irrelevant to those fact. Marriage has held a variety of definitions across numerous eras and cultures. There is not and never has been one true and universal definition of marriage.

  6. #296
    Sage

    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,889

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Correction: the definition has been forever changing. Polygamy is an historical fact, both as polygyny and polyandry. Incest marriages are a historical fact. Same sex marriages are a historical fact. For that matter ghost marriages (marrying a live person to a deceased person) area a historical fact. Your views are irrelevant to those fact. Marriage has held a variety of definitions across numerous eras and cultures. There is not and never has been one true and universal definition of marriage.
    Who in Sam Hill was looking for a "universal" definition of marriage? Go read my post again. I specifically focused on how marriage was defined in this country from it's founding. I focused on the history of polygamy during the mid 1800's in the Utah territory. I stated today most places that practice polygamy are countries governed by Sharia Law.

    How you got "universal" definition of marriage out of that is beyond me.

  7. #297
    Sage
    ksu_aviator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Worth Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    6,691
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Polygamy Advocate Groups Hail Judge Ruling in Utah

    Have I not said for years that the government shouldn't be involved in marriage. Get the government out and let social constructs take control of what was and is rightfully theirs. You can't regulate marriage without violating someone's freedom of religion. It just can't be done.
    You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

  8. #298
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,966

    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.
    And this is why I dont care if polygamy is recognized but I do not believe that any additional (or fewer) rights, protections, benefits, privileges should be accorded by the govt than for 2 person marriages. It should be the same, no matter how many participants. (I dont think the govt should be involved in marriage but since they are, my view is it should not discriminate and the benefits should be equal.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  9. #299
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,488

    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
    This decision really has nothing to do with Lawrence, Windsor, or Hollingsworth and it makes sense even without those decisions. The law was/is unconstitutionally vague and was applied in a discriminatory manner. In Lawrence, the State of Texas exempted heterosexuals in the application of its anti-sodomy law and used it solely to prosecute homosexuals. In this case, as the judge points out, Utah used this law to specifically target Mormons while exempting, in its application, adulterous cohabitation committed by all other persons. The only real relation to other cases mentioned is the unconstitutionally discriminatory nature of the law's application. The moral of the story is that you cannot enshrine the unconstitutional principle of second class citizenship into law no matter what the law is regulating.

  10. #300
    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 wolfsgirl View Post
    Then please explain the point, because the issue from the OP was not about marriage at all. The case is about cohabitation, the marriage laws were upheld. The only thing that changed was the cohabitation law. Anyone can say they are married, but the government only recognizes legal marriage, not people saying they are married. Many people live together and are not legally married, that is not against the law. Now that is not against the law in Utah either.
    Utah's bigamy statute

    A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person. ... It shall be a defense to bigamy that the accused reasonably believed he and the other person were legally eligible to remarry.
    ”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.

Page 30 of 37 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 ... 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
  •