Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Utah Polygamist Invokes Ruling on Gay Sex
AP ^ | December 1, 2003 | MARK THIESSEN

Posted on 12/01/2003 5:01:52 PM PST by Kay Soze

December 1, 2003, 7:38 PM EST

SALT LAKE CITY -- A lawyer for a Utah man with five wives argued Monday that his polygamy convictions should be thrown out following a Supreme Court decision decriminalizing gay sex.

The nation's high court in June struck down a Texas sodomy law, ruling that what gay men and women do in the privacy of their homes is no business of government.

It's no different for polygamists, argued Tom Green's attorney, John Bucher, to the Utah Supreme Court.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: blueoyster; buttpirates; catholiclist; disney; gay; gaylifestyle; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; lawrencevtexas; marriage; polygamy; prisoners; slipperyslope; sodomy; stoptheexcerpts; tomgreen; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last
Its starting!
1 posted on 12/01/2003 5:01:52 PM PST by Kay Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Sorry Dubya. Surprise visits to the troops can only delay you facing this issue for so long. How's about you deal with this?
2 posted on 12/01/2003 5:04:19 PM PST by KantianBurke (Don't Tread on Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
We expected it. And here it is. My, my that slippery slope sure is steep.

Gum

3 posted on 12/01/2003 5:04:31 PM PST by ChewedGum (http://king-of-fools.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
A guy can have more than one wife soon? Woo hoo! (ducking)
Joking, joking....really...
4 posted on 12/01/2003 5:04:40 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("Why does it happen? Because it happens, roll the bones")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Am I completely and totally nuts... or is this precisely the sort of thing that Andrew Sullivan has been pooh-poohing might happen for weeks and weeks now...? :)
5 posted on 12/01/2003 5:04:48 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("The Clintons have damaged our country. They have done it together, in unison." -- Peggy Noonan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Yes, I'm shocked---SHOCKED!!!---that anybody would use the "marriage is what you want it to be" ruling to change marriage to what he wants it to be. This could never have been foreseen!
6 posted on 12/01/2003 5:05:11 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Pre-empt the third murder attempt-- Pray for Terry Schiavo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
I've never understood why it would be legal to have one wife and four mistresses, but not five wives. Presumably at least the last four wives are not legally married to him, so even if they all want to look at it as a marriage arrangement, I don't understand how the law can differentiate, at least in an unfavorable way, between this situation and that of a man who has five mistresses, assuming he pays support for children resulting from those extramarital affairs.
7 posted on 12/01/2003 5:06:14 PM PST by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
I don't think gay sex should be outlawed.

My wife and I are very cheerful...
8 posted on 12/01/2003 5:06:56 PM PST by Poohbah ("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
would you introduce one of your five wives as your better 1/6th? (since 2 become "better half" or 1/2 I went for 1/6 - thought I'd better explain the math! hehe)
9 posted on 12/01/2003 5:07:33 PM PST by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Next will be incest marriages.

With some sort of proviso not to have kids.
10 posted on 12/01/2003 5:07:54 PM PST by Kay Soze (Liberal Homosexuals kill more people than Global Warming, SUVsí, Firearms & Terrorism combined.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
The guy will lose & the Supreme Court won't grant cert. Bank it!
11 posted on 12/01/2003 5:08:28 PM PST by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
in Islam you can have 4 wives ... no wonder some men choose moo ha med.
12 posted on 12/01/2003 5:08:59 PM PST by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bobby777
would you introduce one of your five wives as your better 1/6th?

Followed by the remaining 2/3rds not speaking to you for a month...

13 posted on 12/01/2003 5:09:03 PM PST by Poohbah ("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Incestual marriage should be fine as long you abort the kids.
14 posted on 12/01/2003 5:09:27 PM PST by azcap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
yep - down the slope we go .... Honey lock up the Sheep!
15 posted on 12/01/2003 5:09:52 PM PST by 11th_VA (If you can read this IN ENGLISH - Thank a Veteran !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
I wondered about that too with "common law" marriages as defined by the state after x number of years ... suppose 3 live together as "dating" for 7 years in California ... who becomes who's common law spouse? ... flip a coin? ... elimidate?
16 posted on 12/01/2003 5:10:50 PM PST by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Does that mean five times the alimony when they split up? Will only the guy have to pay, or do the remaining wives have to pay, too?

-PJ

17 posted on 12/01/2003 5:11:06 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's not safe yet to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 11th_VA
yep - down the slope we go .... Honey lock up the Sheep!

"Wyoming...where the men are men...and the sheep are scared!"

18 posted on 12/01/2003 5:11:10 PM PST by Poohbah ("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
just imagine if all 5 were mad at you at the same time ... aye carumba ...
19 posted on 12/01/2003 5:12:29 PM PST by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
Some circuit court will rule for the polygamist, and then the Supremes will have to take it.
20 posted on 12/01/2003 5:13:07 PM PST by maro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue; Canticle_of_Deborah; Desdemona; Salvation; NYer; Flying Circus; narses; ...
Lawrence vs. Kansas ping

Scalia? Santorum? What did they say?

21 posted on 12/01/2003 5:13:24 PM PST by nickcarraway (www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bobby777
Remember...when you have a group of women living together, their cycles tend to start lining up.

Imagine all 5 having PMS at the same time.
22 posted on 12/01/2003 5:13:49 PM PST by Poohbah ("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Mormon wants more men.

23 posted on 12/01/2003 5:14:31 PM PST by Agnes Heep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Without Judeo-Christianity, why not?
24 posted on 12/01/2003 5:17:58 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Imagine all 5 having PMS at the same time.

my guess would be one VERY dead man ... and ...


25 posted on 12/01/2003 5:18:03 PM PST by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
And it's not just Mormons. "Polyamory" is the new left-wing sex craze.
26 posted on 12/01/2003 5:18:19 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
It's no different for polygamists, argued Tom Green's attorney...

Well, yes they are. Polygamists are not organized, nor an important special interest in the Democratic Party.

27 posted on 12/01/2003 5:19:24 PM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Next will be incest marriages.

Once upon a time, the law in Kentucky stated that the age of consent for a young lady to marry was (either 14 or 16, I dont remember which), "unless the woman has been previously married or the bride & groom are related"

28 posted on 12/01/2003 5:20:09 PM PST by Ford Fairlane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
Yeah I can see how this is an important issue compared to National Security. . . No really. . . I can. . .

Anyways. . . I never really could figure out what wrong with homosexual relationships and why so called conservatives want the the goverment to legislate laws against it?!

I thought that one of the basis of conservatism was to remove big goverment from our private lives?!
29 posted on 12/01/2003 5:21:58 PM PST by Tempest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Bingo.
30 posted on 12/01/2003 5:23:05 PM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: maro
The guy isn't suing for the right to sleep with multiple women in private, but rather the right to have his relationships contractualized by the state. I think I'll wait until at least one court interprets Lawrence v Texas as requiring gay marriage before I worry about any court finding in Lawrence a right to multiple, simultaneous marriages.
31 posted on 12/01/2003 5:23:19 PM PST by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
All I can say about polygamy is in Chinese:

The ideographic symbol for "trouble" is that of a house, with two "woman" ideographs inside. . .
32 posted on 12/01/2003 5:25:20 PM PST by Salgak (don't mind me: the orbital mind control lasers are making me write this. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Were as I see your point after reading the whole article it appears that this guy is a real low-life who isn't up to the responsibility of taking care of his 5 wives and countless kid, plus not all of his wives are up to the legal age of consent.
33 posted on 12/01/2003 5:25:51 PM PST by Tempest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: azcap
Incestual marriage should be fine as long you abort the kids.

Sometime before puberty?

34 posted on 12/01/2003 5:26:07 PM PST by nosofar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Trust me, you will be amazed at the irony of seeing the "Mormon" Church and its membership -- many of whom are legislators and judges both at the state and national levels, speaking out as the most vocal opponents of the return of polygamy in this century......
35 posted on 12/01/2003 5:29:16 PM PST by tracer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
The guy will lose & the Supreme Court won't grant cert. Bank it!

People will never be able to suck the brains out of partially born children, bank it!

Uh oh, thats exactly what people do.

Lawrence is analagous to Roe and Goodridge is analagous to Doe v Bolton. History is clear, the elitists never contract precedent it is always expanded.

No surprise here. Next up in Massachusetts will be a couple of friends or brother and sister who love each other and want access to each others government bennies. It's gonna happen and the SJC of Massachusetts has written an opinion that won't allow them to deny the request.

36 posted on 12/01/2003 5:29:31 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
I think I'll wait until at least one court interprets Lawrence v Texas as requiring gay marriage before I worry about any court finding in Lawrence a right to multiple, simultaneous marriages.

Short wait, the Mass SJC did just that.

37 posted on 12/01/2003 5:30:59 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
If this guy is successful, I'm sure Michael Jackson will be watching this case with more than a passing interest.
38 posted on 12/01/2003 5:31:36 PM PST by miele man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tempest
shhhhh you'll interupt the homobashfest. That's much more important that limited government. /sarcasm
39 posted on 12/01/2003 5:32:53 PM PST by honeygrl (FreeRepublic.com "The Crack Cocaine of Conservative News Discussion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tempest
IF we had a judiciary that respected state's rights then most folks could bank on silly things such as gay marriage never coming to pass in their own states. However as we had a Judicial system made up of philosopher kings who can and do disregard the Constitution at will, the only measure that will prevent gay marriage and G-d knows what else from being instituted across the land is a Federal Amendment. Hence why Bush should get involved.
40 posted on 12/01/2003 5:33:53 PM PST by KantianBurke (Don't Tread on Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
The Mass SJC ruled on the basis of state law, not federal law. You didn't really think I'd overlook something so obvious, did you?
41 posted on 12/01/2003 5:35:42 PM PST by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
I won't hold my breath waiting for the apologies to Sen. Santorum.
42 posted on 12/01/2003 5:36:38 PM PST by B Knotts (Go 'Nucks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Its starting!

And won't end until one can "marry" one's pet. The slide into Sodom and Gomorrah continues.

5.56mm

43 posted on 12/01/2003 5:36:51 PM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
From the decision:

"Our obligation is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate our own moral code." Lawrence v. Texas, 123 S. Ct. 2472, 2480 (2003) (Lawrence), quoting Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 850 (1992).

44 posted on 12/01/2003 5:36:51 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"My wife and I are very cheerful..."

No doubt you have a gay old time.

45 posted on 12/01/2003 5:39:28 PM PST by truthandjustice1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: scripter
And so...it begins.
46 posted on 12/01/2003 5:39:54 PM PST by I_Love_My_Husband
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ford Fairlane
Once upon a time, the law in Kentucky stated that the age of consent for a young lady to marry was (either 14 or 16, I dont remember which), "unless the woman has been previously married or the bride & groom are related"

Incest will make your teeth fall out.

47 posted on 12/01/2003 5:40:23 PM PST by X-FID ( The police aren't in the streets to create disorder; they are in the streets to preserve disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Bobby777
This may be the ultimate time share.
48 posted on 12/01/2003 5:40:32 PM PST by truthandjustice1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Lawrence was superfluous to the decision, as it was to the decisions in Hawai'i, Alaska, and Vermont which preceded Lawrence. If you don't believe me, get back to me when the State of Massachusetts appeals Goodrich to the Supreme Court of the United States.
49 posted on 12/01/2003 5:43:31 PM PST by AntiGuv (When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Tempest
"Anyways. . . I never really could figure out what wrong with homosexual relationships and why so called conservatives want the the goverment to legislate laws against it?! "

Right. Homos are just a Tempest in a tea pot. Right?

50 posted on 12/01/2003 5:44:12 PM PST by truthandjustice1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson