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

Skip to comments.

Suit Challenges Constitutionality of Utah Ban on Polygamy
Salt Lake Tribune ^ | January 12, 2004 | Alexandria Sage

Posted on 01/12/2004 2:11:03 PM PST by mrobison

SALT LAKE CITY — A leading civil rights attorney prepared Monday to file a federal lawsuit challenging Utah’s ban on polygamy, citing the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Texas sodomy law.

The suit says Salt Lake County clerks refused a marriage license to plaintiffs G. Lee Cook, an adult male, and J. Bronson, an adult female, because Cook was already married to D. Cook. That woman had given her consent to the additional marriage.

In denying the marriage license, the county violated the plaintiffs’ First Amendment right to practice their religion, attorney Brian Barnard says in the suit.

The suit, an advance copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, does not mention what faith the plaintiffs observe, except to say polygamy is a ‘‘sincere and deeply held religious major tenet.’’

The suit argues that the Supreme Court ruling last June in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down laws criminalizing gay sex, protects the defendants’ privacy in intimate matters.

Polygamy, a felony under Utah law, was a part of the early beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but was abandoned more than a century ago as the territory sought statehood.

The Utah Constitution bans polygamy and the Mormon church now excommunicates those who advocate it, but it is believed that thousands in Utah continue the practice.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: activistcourt; consentingadults; culturewar; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; lawrencevtexas; polygamy; prisoners; samesexmarriage; slipperyslope; supremecourt; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-319 next last
I'm so confused...
1 posted on 01/12/2004 2:11:03 PM PST by mrobison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mrobison
The inevitable result, as predicted, of the court decision on gay marriage, etc.
2 posted on 01/12/2004 2:14:39 PM PST by Redbob (now to find a cure for global whining...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
Why a man would want more than one wife at a time dwelves into sanity issues, IMO.
3 posted on 01/12/2004 2:14:42 PM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
In denying the marriage license, the county violated the plaintiffs’ First Amendment right to practice their religion, attorney Brian Barnard says in the suit.

Actually he has a better shot with that ever elusive 14th amendment where so-called privacy trumps reason. This should be an easy win after Lawrence. Bet the media left forgets they own Rick Santorum an apology.

4 posted on 01/12/2004 2:15:03 PM PST by King Black Robe (With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
SORRY!

Meant to say, "Inevitable result of Supreme Court decision on Texas sodomy statute."
5 posted on 01/12/2004 2:15:54 PM PST by Redbob (now to find a cure for global whining...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
Read Rick Santorm's predictions of the consequences of the Lawrence case. It happened faster than anybody expected, but it is just as expected in content.
6 posted on 01/12/2004 2:16:59 PM PST by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
The irony of these folks using a struck-down anti-sodomy law to advocate for their religious rights is just too out there.
7 posted on 01/12/2004 2:18:25 PM PST by mrobison (We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
Hey, Mod Squad:

If this isn't legit Breaking News, I don't know what is. Why did you pull it?

8 posted on 01/12/2004 2:19:50 PM PST by mrobison (We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: mrobison
Here it comes - the fall-out from the Texas Sodomite decision
11 posted on 01/12/2004 2:25:41 PM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
A good day for Libertarians! What is the problem??

12 posted on 01/12/2004 2:26:41 PM PST by need_a_screen_name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrobison; Green Knight
This is the logical outgrowth of the Massachusetts decision and all that the lawyer is doing here is taking it to its logical extremes. And since we can't have the government meddling in religion or some kind of "optional polygamy" for Mormon schismatics and the like, the inevitable result is going to be the creation of a kind of secular polygamy.

Oui.
13 posted on 01/12/2004 2:27:01 PM PST by Angelus Errare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: mrobison

I have yet to see a good reason for polygamy among consenting adults to be outlawed.


15 posted on 01/12/2004 2:32:22 PM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
Let's stop here and remember Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas from last June:
"...State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity are ... sustainable only in light of Bowers validation of laws based on moral choices," ... "This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation."
So it goes...
16 posted on 01/12/2004 2:34:47 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrobison; little jeremiah
Bump and ping.
17 posted on 01/12/2004 2:35:03 PM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Angelus Errare
The problem mostly happens when the state is asked to call these second, third, etc. partnerships marriage. Mere unmarried cohabitation, however immoral is no longer illegal in many (most?) places.
18 posted on 01/12/2004 2:35:25 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: mrobison
Hope they included polyandry. It wouldn't be fair for just men to get the multiple contract option.
20 posted on 01/12/2004 2:37:11 PM PST by bicycle thug (I'm just a Pitbull on the pant leg of opportunity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Rebelbase
Why a man would want more than one wife at a time dwelves into sanity issues, IMO.

Yes, the sane man's debate is zero versus one.

22 posted on 01/12/2004 2:37:46 PM PST by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: bicycle thug
Or in general, M to F relationships, M>=1, F>=1, (M+F)>2. E.g. 3 wives, 2 hubbies. This gets messy fast.
24 posted on 01/12/2004 2:42:11 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Going on 30 years with the same woman. I'd be dead by now if I had two or three...
25 posted on 01/12/2004 2:42:31 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
>Why a man would want more than one wife at a time dwelves into sanity issues, IMO.



Well, suppose you are
already hitched to Britney
and Christina, then

you find out about
young Stacie Orrico... You
need legal options...

26 posted on 01/12/2004 2:45:01 PM PST by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #27 Removed by Moderator

To: Eris
So you are prepared to legalize prostitution, bestiality, incest (as long as it's consensual) and dramatically lowering the age of consent (because after all, a girl of 12 or 13 is mentally capable of makign a decision whether or not to have sex.)

You have to be prepared for these things, if we as a society have decided to there is no reason to regulate sex as long as it's "consensual."
28 posted on 01/12/2004 2:46:01 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss
ROFLOL
29 posted on 01/12/2004 2:46:32 PM PST by Professional Engineer (The meek can have the Earth. I want the stars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
I'm so confused... me too mrobison, how do they prove they are gay?
30 posted on 01/12/2004 2:48:07 PM PST by sure_fine (*not one to over kill the thought process*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: Utah Binger
And, then, there are those who are plain apostate.
32 posted on 01/12/2004 2:49:15 PM PST by mrobison (We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: need_a_screen_name
A good day for Libertarians!

Open borders, sodomy, polygamy, oh my!!

33 posted on 01/12/2004 2:49:53 PM PST by AdamSelene235 (I always shoot for the moon......sometimes I hit London.- Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen


Yes, no, yes (assuming parties are over 18) and no.

34 posted on 01/12/2004 2:50:05 PM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
that way the two women can talk to each other and leave the poor man alone.
35 posted on 01/12/2004 2:51:30 PM PST by camas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
OK, 'Courts',...What are you going to do NOW?!?!
36 posted on 01/12/2004 2:54:21 PM PST by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Eris
Here's one reason;
About a year ago(?) there was a guy in Utah being prosecuted for polygamy (a Mr. Green? who even appeared on O'Reilly) - he had something like 15 wives and about 35 kids total as I recall. He was unemployed and all 15 separate wives & kids were ALL ON WELFARE!!

That's reason enough - period.

37 posted on 01/12/2004 2:57:25 PM PST by Condor51 ("Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments." -- Frederick the Great)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Eris
Thanks for your answer. Why would you legalize prostitution but not bestiality? Why would you legalize consensual polygamy between consenting men and women, but not lower the age of consent?
38 posted on 01/12/2004 2:58:18 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
Under old Gaelic law, a man could only have as many wives as he could afford to feed.

Sounds good to me. We need to end welfare anyway.

39 posted on 01/12/2004 2:58:56 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Condor51


I'd venture to guess there's more one-man/one-wife married couples on welfare than polygamists.

40 posted on 01/12/2004 2:59:29 PM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen


1) Because animals can't give consent. They don't have rights, but they are deserving of certain protections from cruelty.

2) Because it doesn't follow that if A) the standard is consenting adults that B) the age of consent should be lowered. Total non-sequitur.

41 posted on 01/12/2004 3:01:13 PM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Eris
There is a strong correlation between polygyny (having more than one wife at a time) and homosexual behavior. The best known pattern is in the Arab world in which rich and powerful men have up to four legal wives plus concubines. It makes it impossible for many young men to find nubile women. Even though homosexual behavior is severely penalized by Islam, homosexual behavior is rampant in many Muslim areas.


42 posted on 01/12/2004 3:02:19 PM PST by Lucas McCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
Well, we jumped through these hoops to get into the union...


Utah State Constitution

Article XXIV, Section 2. [Territorial laws continued.]

All laws of the Territory of Utah now in force, not repugnant to this Constitution, shall remain in force until they expire by their own limitations, or are altered or repealed by the Legislature. The act of the Governor and Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Utah, entitled, "An Act to punish polygamy and other kindred offenses," approved February 4th, A.D. 1892, in so far as the same defines and imposes penalties for polygamy, is hereby declared to be in force in the State of Utah.

43 posted on 01/12/2004 3:03:58 PM PST by glock rocks (Support Free Republic -- Pray for our Troops -- God bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucas McCain

I'm still not seeing why the law should be involved.


44 posted on 01/12/2004 3:04:42 PM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Eris
Yes, no, yes (assuming parties are over 18) and no.

Justice O'Connor! How nice to see you! Thank God you brought the stone tablets, because no earthly force could figure this out.

45 posted on 01/12/2004 3:04:42 PM PST by Mason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mason


Unable to form a relevant response, eh?

Don't worry - no one is surprised.
46 posted on 01/12/2004 3:05:38 PM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Lucas McCain
There is a strong correlation between polygyny (having more than one wife at a time) and homosexual behavior.

Actually, the correlation is between non-companionate marriage and homosexuality.

If the costs of having a wife are low, a greater portion of the homosexual spectrum will take them.

47 posted on 01/12/2004 3:06:40 PM PST by AdamSelene235 (I always shoot for the moon......sometimes I hit London.- Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: theFIRMbss
Well, suppose you are already hitched to Britney and Christina, then

you find out about young Stacie Orrico... You need legal options...

And a good therapist, a ringmaster, and plenty of vitamin V.

48 posted on 01/12/2004 3:08:33 PM PST by LPM1888 (What are the facts? Again and again and again -- what are the facts? - Lazarus Long)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks
I know..

We should seek reparations for all those monogamous years.

:)

49 posted on 01/12/2004 3:10:42 PM PST by mrobison (We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mrobison
Between this post and some others right now current on FreeRepublic breaking news, I feel like we are truly living in the times of the Romans. Caligula anyone?
50 posted on 01/12/2004 3:11:33 PM PST by Donna Lee Nardo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-319 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