Does a polygamist with 6 wives get six different tax breaks? Tune in next week when Richard Gere attempts to marry his pet gerbil.
To: .cnI redruM
"In pious times, ere priestcraft did begin,
Before polygamy was made a sin;
When man on many multiplied his kind,
Ere one to one was cursedly confined;
When nature prompted, and no law denied,
Promiscuous use of concubine and bride;
Then Israel's monarch, after heaven's own heart,
His vigorous warmth did variously impart
To wives and slaves; and, wide as his command,
Scattered his Maker's image through the land.....
To: .cnI redruM
May God bless that little girl.
3 posted on
12/08/2003 12:24:36 PM PST by
Pan_Yans Wife
("Your joy is your sorrow unmasked." --- GIBRAN)
To: .cnI redruM
And so the idiocy spreads like fungal rot, now that all is ok, and all is condoned.
4 posted on
12/08/2003 12:27:23 PM PST by
samtheman
To: .cnI redruM
Does a polygamist with 6 wives get six different tax breaks? I'm not sure but he certainly gets six mother-in-laws. Can you imagine that?
5 posted on
12/08/2003 12:27:47 PM PST by
Reeses
To: .cnI redruM
He should take this to the Mass. Supreme Court, where he would probably get a 'tufer.' A court not to quibble, they would probably rule that not only could he teach his daughter, but he could marry his daughter. Massachooosetts -- the gateway to license.
6 posted on
12/08/2003 12:28:10 PM PST by
Eastbound
To: .cnI redruM
Polygamy's illegal everyplace, and it's illegal for a whole lot of reasons give it a few minutes and that will change - after the SCOTUS FU on the Texas sodomy ruling, Massachusetts courts "blessed" gay marriage and there is now a case brewing where a guy convicted of polygamy wants the conviction overturned...Santorum is being proved right when he said that SCOTUS had opened Pandora's Box and that all sorts of social mores would be pushed to the wayside.
7 posted on
12/08/2003 12:29:49 PM PST by
trebb
To: .cnI redruM
Not withstanding that it is wrong, consider the following:
Isn't this infringing on his freedom of speech? Also, isn't it abridging his religious beliefs? Just because they do not have an officially sanctioned religion, doesn't "fundamentalist" Mormonism count as a religion? What about what happens in a person's home is of no business of the government (established in the case of the two Texas gay men)? Technically, couldn't he say that making polygamy illegal is establishing religion (which is unconstitutional)?
Just some food for thought (and discussion).
8 posted on
12/08/2003 12:37:26 PM PST by
looscnnn
("Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils" Gen. John Stark 1809)
To: .cnI redruM
Polygamy is slavery hiding behind religion.
9 posted on
12/08/2003 12:37:26 PM PST by
tkathy
(The islamofascists and the democrats are trying to destroy this country)
To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; Timesink; dubyaismypresident; Grani; coug97; ...
Just damn.If you want on the new list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
12 posted on
12/08/2003 12:40:40 PM PST by
mhking
To: .cnI redruM
Telling a child about adults marrying multiple spouses is "child abuse" and puts them at risk of "sexual abuse" according to this lawyer but having a homosexual parent is perfectly okay for children in modern America.
The liberal double standard knows no bounds.
19 posted on
12/08/2003 12:58:45 PM PST by
weegee
(No blood for ratings! This means YOU AOL-Time-Warner-Turner-CNN)
To: .cnI redruM
"But some fundamentalist Mormons continue to believe in polygamy" Should have read: "But some faithful Mormons continue to believe in polygamy"
31 posted on
12/08/2003 1:40:03 PM PST by
fishtank
To: .cnI redruM
(s) as long as they like to have sex, the Mass SC says its ok. (/s)
To: .cnI redruM
He probably wants to marry said daughter......
36 posted on
12/08/2003 3:21:08 PM PST by
tracer
To: .cnI redruM
A man can't teach his daughter about his religious beliefs? That is wrong. No matter how weird they are his beliefs. I know of a number of religious beliefs that are much weirder then polygamy which was, in its day, a useful social construct that allowed there to be large families without forcing one woman to do all the bearing and raising of the children. Not to mention all the housework.
A woman can not teach her daughter that the mother's former relationship was sinful. In fact she must never allow the girl to go anywhere that she might hear it.
Just as wrong. The court should have no more right to tell a divorced parent what they may teach a child then they do a married one.
37 posted on
12/08/2003 3:50:10 PM PST by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(My ex is saying that I have become hostile. I wonder why Speed-bump would think that?)
To: .cnI redruM
Whatever ruling is made in this case could one day be used for or agaisnt Christians that want to teach their kids that homosexuality is a sin or any other non-PC doctrine. A ruling that does the right thing for the wrong reason leaves the door open to later doing the wrong thing for the same wrong reason.
38 posted on
12/09/2003 9:02:08 AM PST by
Grig
To: .cnI redruM
Roberts' lawyer, Richard K. Konkel, said learning about polygamy from her father could put Kaylynne at risk of "child abuse and sexual abuse and whatever else." I wonder if polygamy wives regard their arrangements with their common husband as sexual abuse? Not that I'd recomment polygamy or polyandry, but what does that have to do with sexual abuse or child abuse? Isn't Mr. Konkel, Esq. reaching a bit?
To: .cnI redruM
recomment = recommend
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson