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

Skip to comments.

[Colo.] Court OKs marriage for 12-year-old girls
upi via email no link | 6/16/6

Posted on 06/16/2006 5:24:56 AM PDT by NativeNewYorker

DENVER, June 16 (UPI) -- A Colorado appeals court ruling makes legal a common law marriage between a 14-year-old boy and 12-year-old girl.

The ruling reverses a lower court finding that a 15-year-old girl was too young for a common law union, the Rocky Mountain News reported Friday.

While not firmly establishing a minimum age, the three-judge panel noted that Colorado recognizes English common law unions, which legalize such marriages at 12 for girls and 14 for boys.

The decision involves a Weld County case in which a girl identified only as J.M.H. began living with Willis Lee Rouse in 2002 when she was 14 and he was 34, the newspaper said.

Rouse is now a 38-year-old inmate at the Fremont Correctional Facility, serving four years for stalking and escape, the Rocky Mountain News reported, while J.M.H., in the midst of a dependency and neglect action, recently turned 18.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: saywhat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 06/16/2006 5:24:58 AM PDT by NativeNewYorker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Colorado...The Pedophile State


2 posted on 06/16/2006 5:26:28 AM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

I guess Scott Ritter will soon be moving to Colorado.


3 posted on 06/16/2006 5:31:01 AM PDT by RightWingAtheist (Creationism is to conservatism what Howard Dean is to liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker
What next?

Utterly and completely unbelievable. No common sense left in the top courts of Colorado.

4 posted on 06/16/2006 5:33:51 AM PDT by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Giggity Giggity Giggity.
Alriiiiiiight.


5 posted on 06/16/2006 5:35:04 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Sounds like another judge for the Factor.


6 posted on 06/16/2006 5:39:40 AM PDT by satchmodog9 (Most people stand on the tracks and never even hear the train coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

What a confusing article.
And what a screwed up decision!
Good Grief! What ever happened to statutory rape?


7 posted on 06/16/2006 5:40:10 AM PDT by nuconvert ([there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RSmithOpt

"No common sense left in the top courts of Colorado."

One seems to forget that courts are supposed to rule on the law as it is written, not common sense. The problem lies with the legisature not the court, they write the laws.


8 posted on 06/16/2006 5:48:00 AM PDT by oldcomputerguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker
Anti-pedophile, anti-liberal Sarcasm Torpedo ARMED. FIRE!!

Q. What do Darth Vader Ginsburg, NAMBLA, Michael Jackson, the prophet Mohammed, and the state of Colorado have in common?

A. A deep respect for the traditions of pedophiles. Full Disclosure: Let's get a quote from Arlen 'Scottish Law' Spectre, too.

Second Disclosure: with the courts' increasing reliance on looking overseas for inspiration, would Ginsburg go for sharia law anytime soon?

9 posted on 06/16/2006 5:48:01 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kittymyrib
You hit the nail on the head: Colorado - the Pedophile State.

This is outrageous, part of a trend to promote same sex and polygamous marriages and make marriage a meaningless institution.

10 posted on 06/16/2006 5:48:41 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

The courts will be used to obtain the "desired" lowering of the age of consent. The sodomites want little boys and will reach them through the courts. No legislature in its right mind would bring up, debate and vote upon lowering the age of consent.


11 posted on 06/16/2006 5:52:57 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

Apparently the problem is that common law marriage is recognized and no legislation has been passed to limit the ages. He is going by the historical common law rules, which are rather dated now. Funny how a judge makes a non-activist decision and gets lambasted for it.

Colorado's common law marriage legislation is quite relaxed, simply saying that valid common law marriages should be recognized, and only requiring the couple consider themselves and represent themselves as married and that they cohabit. I guess if they do these things they are considered in a common law marriage and do an end run around the age of consent (17 there). Considering de facto marriage requires parental permission at that age and common law marriage does not, obviously the legislature needs to go back and revisit their common law marriage laws and make needed modifications.


12 posted on 06/16/2006 6:13:27 AM PDT by ahayes ("If intelligent design evolved from creationism, then why are there still creationists?"--Quark2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ahayes

Is puberty even a factor? Sounds like an 8 year old would also qualify.


13 posted on 06/16/2006 6:21:13 AM PDT by bboop (Stealth Tutor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bboop

Going by the old law that common law is based on, the limit is 12 for girls and 14 for boys.


14 posted on 06/16/2006 6:30:59 AM PDT by ahayes ("If intelligent design evolved from creationism, then why are there still creationists?"--Quark2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker
Hey... Denver is a "home rule" city right? If they wanna step off into complete and utter lunacy who's to argue?

At least, that is what I've been told by "home rule" advocates here on FR who support Denver's gun bans as well.

I wonder if any will pony up some testosterone and defend this idiot court decision as well...

15 posted on 06/16/2006 6:31:45 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (It is not the oath that makes us believe the man, but the man the oath.- Aeschylus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ahayes

Anyone care to explain to me what "common law" marriage is? To me it simply is a way to avoid real marraige and abuse the system (can claim marraige to gain benefits that are allowed to common law marraiges, but not have the encomberances or responsibilites of real marriage?).

It's either a marriage or not. If folks can just claim to be married (common law), then what's the purpose of what most of us call "real" marraige???


16 posted on 06/16/2006 6:33:41 AM PDT by TheBattman (Islam (and liberalism)- the cult of a Cancer on Society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman
There's some information on Wikipedia that talks about it.

It essentially is a real marriage. If you're in a common-law marriage, the only way out is through death or divorce.

I think what we call "real marriage" came about largely through the intervention of the Church. I'm not sure how the government got in on it.

I personally don't see the appeal in common law marriage, to me it seems to be limited to lower-class whites or perhaps those of certain religions??

17 posted on 06/16/2006 6:39:54 AM PDT by ahayes ("If intelligent design evolved from creationism, then why are there still creationists?"--Quark2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker

I drove through Colorado last year. Next time I wash my car, I'm gonna scrub real good.

18 posted on 06/16/2006 6:43:51 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (One flag--American. One language--English. One allegiance--to America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ahayes
Apparently the problem is that common law marriage is recognized and no legislation has been passed to limit the ages. He is going by the historical common law rules, which are rather dated now. Funny how a judge makes a non-activist decision and gets lambasted for it.

Exactly- it is something the legislature should have taken care of a long time ago, yet no one will blame them. I am sure that they will finally pass a law to raise the minimum age of marriage.

19 posted on 06/16/2006 7:21:08 AM PDT by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NativeNewYorker
Can sombody explain what the difference between a common law marriage and a reguler marriage is?
20 posted on 06/16/2006 7:21:18 AM PDT by edgrimly78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 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