Utah polygamy ban is challenged

KRON 4 ^ | January 28, 2004 | AP

[yonif]

Salt Lake City-AP -- Last year's Supreme Court decision striking down Texas' ban on sodomy could have legal repercussions in Utah.

A civil rights attorney has filed a federal suit, challenging Utah's ban on polygamy. And some legal experts say the case could succeed, because of the high court's ruling in the sodomy case.

The Texas case involved two gay men who were arrested after police went into their apartment and found them having sex.

The Utah suit involves a married couple and another woman who wanted to enter into a group marriage but were denied a marriage license by Salt Lake County clerks.

The suit cites the high court decision in saying the county violates the plaintiffs' right to privacy in intimate matters, along with their religious freedom.

Utah has banned polygamy for years, even though it was an early belief of Mormons. Some legal experts say the state will have to show why polygamy is bad for society.

But others say the Texas case involved private behavior in a bedroom -- and it will be tough to apply the Supreme Court decision to something as open as marriage.

[goldstategop]

The only reason it won't succeed is Mormons are not popular with liberals and its not their lifestyle, its on account of their conservative family values.

[Prime Choice]

You knew it would come to this. The moment one aberrant "lifestyle" is legitimized by judicial activism, all others will follow suit (no pun intended).

Next up: pedophiles demand equal rights.

[GulliverSwift]

These wackos don't have to have lots of wives, they can just have lots of live-in honeys. They can call them "wives" if they want to. This is how many rap stars live already.

[LS]

Legally, you can't make a distinction. If what "people do in the privacy of their own homes" is a "right," then the law has no grounds to deny polygamy, beastiality, or sex with "consenting" minors.

[Prime Choice]

The only reason it won't succeed is Mormons are not popular with liberals and its not their lifestyle, its on account of their conservative family values.

Just wait. Sooner or later a Member of the Religion of Peace^TM will demand that he should legally have a harem and then "it'll all be okay!"

The Mormons will be able to ride in on that ruling...

[Starwind]

Polygamous gay marriages, with paid benefits, coming to a neighborhood near you.

[bobjam]

"Those powers not delegated to the federal government by this constitution, nor denied by it to the states, are reserved from the states and the people respectively"

If the SCOTUS overturns Utah's (and every other state's) polygamy laws, then it will have effectively repealed the 9th Amendment.

[wizardoz]

"There's never an egg timer around when you need one." Joking aside, this is exactly why I oppose gay marriage. If you can change the definition of marriage (union of two willing adults of the opposite sex) to include same sex, why not change it to include more than two people? Why not change the requirement that one or both be adults? Or that they be willing? There's precedent in other cultures for all of the above. Next thing you know, you can "marry" an unwilling 9 year old girl, do whatever you want with her and then "divorce" her. No-fault, of course.

Or you can marry 6 illegal immigrants, making them legal and requiring your employer to provide health insurance (for which you might quietly charge a fee from each new spouse). Oh, the possibilities for wrecking our culture and our ecomony are endless.

Now, let's think. Who's been trying to wreck both since the early 20th century? Oh, well.. guess we should just MoveOn, cause there's no A.N.S.W.E.R. ... But dude, where's my culture?

[Phantom Lord]

The sodomy case and polygamy are not related in any way. I say the guy has no case.

Now, if the state of Utah has a law banning sex with someone other than your spouse, then the sodomy case would apply. Otherwise, they are not related.

[Desdemona]

It was only a matter of time.

[Uncle Miltie]

"Next up: pedophiles demand equal rights."

Some people really like sheep, and vetrinarian benefits cannot be withheld based on speciesism.

[genghis]

If the government can regulate barbers and everybody else, why not regulate marriage as well?

[T'wit]

Coming soon: legal gay polygamous marriage, with goat partners counted as 3/5 of a person.

[eno_]

You are throwing in children presumed not to be able to give consent in with what consenting adults do.

Why not just get government out of the business of regulating marriage? Why, for example, should anyone need a "marriage license?" Why not just have a registry of next-of-kin?

I wonder how old the practice of government marriage licenses is, and whether it is a hangover from miscegenation laws.

[Polycarp IV]

Last year's Supreme Court decision striking down Texas' ban on sodomy could have legal repercussions in Utah.

A civil rights attorney has filed a federal suit, challenging Utah's ban on polygamy. And some legal experts say the case could succeed, because of the high court's ruling in the sodomy case.

The Texas case involved two gay men who were arrested after police went into their apartment and found them having sex.

The Utah suit involves a married couple and another woman who wanted to enter into a group marriage but were denied a marriage license by Salt Lake County clerks.

The suit cites the high court decision in saying the county violates the plaintiffs' right to privacy in intimate matters, along with their religious freedom.

If Rick Santorum (as well as many conservative FReepers) is sitting back with a smug, "See I told you so" smile right now, I sure wouldn't blame him.

;-)

[Barnacle]

Utah polygamy ban is challenged

Who is Utah polygamy? And, what was he banned for?

[SuziQ]

But others say the Texas case involved private behavior in a bedroom -- and it will be tough to apply the Supreme Court decision to something as open as marriage.

Right, tell that to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, or any other activist State Supreme Court in this country which will do anything it can to force homosexual marriage on their citizens WITHOUT their consent!

[sheik yerbouty]

The LDS church has banned polygamy for about 115 years. the "Religion of Peace", however allows up to four wives. That is where the real attempt to breach monagamy will come, if we are foolish enough to allow it.

[freeangel]

"if we are foolish enough to allow it"

Too bad court cases are not decided by "we", but by the raving lunatics who sit on the court. I can see them giving the go-ahead on this.