Polygamy advocates buoyed by gay court wins

Washinton Blade dot com ^ | Friday, December 26, 2003 | By JOE CREA

[hattend]

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) argued in April that if the Supreme Court legalized gay sex, that similar rights for polygamists would follow.

Tom Green, a Mormon polygamist serving a sentence for bigamy in Utah, has argued his conviction should be overturned based on the Lawrence vs. Texas decision.

[Jaxter]

Slippery slope bump..

[maui_hawaii]

Tom Green, a Mormon polygamist...

[OpusatFR]

Frankly, my pets are costing me a bundle in vet bills for various aging related health problems. I wonder if a marriage of convenience to get them covered under my health insurance as a partner would work?

After all, I love them...isn't that the criteria under Massachusetts law?

[ClearCase_guy]

I completely agree that recent pro-Homosexual court decisions make polygamy almost unavoidable. And that raises interesting issues of taxation (my 7 wives and I are filing jointly. I have 22 dependants.) And it will greatly accelerate the coming bankruptcy of Social Security.

The slide has begun, and the thing that will reverse that slide has not yet appeared on the political scene.

[Keyes2000mt]

What the heck does broad political support have to do with anything? After all if this is about the Constitution, it says what it says whether the cause is unpopular or not. The American People as a whole are clamoring for Gay Marriage, so why not polygamy?

[hattend]

The American People as a whole are clamoring for Gay Marriage...

They are?

[Tax-chick]

And that raises interesting issues of taxation (my 7 wives and I are filing jointly. I have 22 dependants.)

Wow, this is going to make the tax business fun in the next few years ... and imagine the multi-state filing complications ... billing by the number of parties involved? It could work ...

[Tax-chick]

A few days before Christmas, President Bush told Diane Sawyer he would support -- "if necessary" -- a constitutional amendment codifying marriage as the relationship between a man and a woman, and only a man and a woman. Came The New York Times, a few days after that, with the news of a new poll showing majority public disapproval of gay marriage.

This is the opener of Bill Murchison's column on Townhall.com today. If even the NYT admits the public doesn't support gay marriage, I think it's safe to say they don't.

[Salgak]

Actually, I **WOULD** still call him a Mormon. The Mormon/LDS church suddenly decided polygamy was wrong when they were told that they wouldn't be allowed to be a state so long as polygamy was permitted/encouraged.

The Elders, or whatever you call them, caved and joined the US. That wouldn't change the original doctrine. . . .

Not defending him, just pointing out that the Government forced a change in Mormon doctrine a century or so ago. . .

[ClearCase_guy]

If even the NYT admits the public doesn't support gay marriage, I think it's safe to say they don't.

But that's the "beauty" of the MA court decision! It just don't matter what the people think. We don't get a chance to vote on it. The Court ordered the legislature to write a law legitimating gay marriage. It (apparently) doesn't matter what the legislature thinks either. And I'm sure you understand the "full faith and credit" clause.

It's coming, brother.

[nothingnew]

What man, in his right mind, would want MORE than one wife??!!

BTW...Keep your eyes on Rick Santorum the next four years...I believe he is going places, much to my delight.

FMCDH

[NeoCaveman]

This nation would be so much better off with a government and court system full of Rick Santorums.

[Viet Vet in Augusta GA]

This may give a whole new meaning to the phrase, "a boy and his dog..."
Why not pets? Why not menages a trois? Why not me and my rutabaga? This is a slippery slope indeed...

[eastsider]

Why not me and my rutabaga?

Ouch!

[conserv13]

I don't think so...if marriage can be a contract between 2 adult humans, it just wouldn't matter what sex they are.

[Cicero]

The big one is going to come when Muslims start demanding the right to marry four wives, according to their religion.

[Go Gordon]

What man, in his right mind, would want MORE than one wife??!!

Not me. No sir. I don't want to disappoint another woman.

[conserv13]

See my post #16 -

Why not pets?

Because pets are not human and cannot consent to a legal agreement.

Why not menages a trois? Why not me and my rutabaga?

Marriage COULD be defined as between any 2 adults not related to each other. I don't know if it should be, but I don't think the slippery slope argument is a good one against it.

LOL...I have had a few ex-girlfriends who were not much brighter than a rutabaga..

[Spiff]

Tom Green, a Mormon polygamist serving a sentence for bigamy in Utah

Tom Green is not "Mormon." He is not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - he is not Mormon. How many times does this have to be repeated before the people who write this stuff get it right? Polygamists are excommunicated and therefore are not Mormon. He can call himself Mormon, but that does not make it so. He can call himself the Queen of England, but still he is not.