Judge Cites Same-Sex Marriage in Declaring Polygamy Ban Unconstitutional

http://www.breitbart.com ^ | December 14, 2013 | Ken Klukowski

[NKP_Vet]

In a game-changer for the legal fight over same-sex marriage that gives credence to opponents’ “slippery slope” arguments, a federal judge has now ruled that the legal reasoning for same-sex marriage means that laws against polygamy are likewise unconstitutional.

In his 91-page opinion in Brown v. Buhman, on Dec. 13, U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups struck down Utah’s law making polygamy a crime. In so doing, he may have opened Pandora’s Box.

As a condition for becoming a state in 1896, Congress required Utah to outlaw polygamy, which is marriage between three or more persons. This case involved a family of fundamentalist offshoots of nineteenth-century Mormonism. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints disavowed polygamy in 1890, and again in 1904, but some splinter groups continue the practice.

Waddoups’ opinion would not only cover such groups, however, but also Muslims or anyone else who claims a right—religious or otherwise—to have multiple-person marriages. He notes that the Supreme Court ruled against polygamy in its 1896 case Reynolds v. U.S., but said he cannot simply rest upon that decision “without seriously addressing the much developed constitutional jurisprudence that now protects individuals from the criminal consequences intended by legislatures to apply to certain personal choices.”

[Scoutmaster]

Utah and Arizona haven't enforced the polygamy ban since the 1953 Short Creek raid.

Even the Utah Attorney General's website states: "Polygamy is illegal in Utah and forbidden by the Arizona constitution. However, law enforcement agencies in both states have decided to focus on crimes within polygamous communities that involve child abuse, domestic violence and fraud."

There are an estimated 40,000 polygamists in the intermountain west.

[exit82]

Polygamy is not in the Constitution, therefore there can be no Federal law banning it.

Ok, Judge.

Healthcare is not in the Constitution either, but it is the law of the land.

Huh?

[GOP Poet]

great cartoon!!

[wonkowasright]

Ladies and gentleman.... I give you a government separated from religion......

[NKP_Vet]

“Sorry, but his reasoning is sound, and no justification for calling him a liberal”

Does the same go for Anthony Kennedy for legalizing sodomy?

[SammyStone]

A seventh-grader discovered that the US is at the mercy of nine cloaked wizards — in plain signt in Washingont DC! Scary. http://dandygoat.com/seventh-grader-reveals-u-s-at-the-mercy-of-nine-wizards

[theBuckwheat]

Because marriage has been seized in some states by forces who are hostile to God’s definition of that institution, it is time to reduce the State’s role in marriage and to return marriage to the private sphere from where it originated.

[Ransomed]

“Polygamy is illegal in Utah and forbidden by the Arizona constitution. However, law enforcement agencies in both states have decided to focus on crimes within polygamous communities that involve child abuse, domestic violence and fraud.”

Yeah, I thought that they don’t even enforce their cohabitation/bigamy law, I seem to recall them always prosecuting on abuse cases or benefit fraud.

Freegards

[combat_boots]

Islam.

It has actually always been about Islam.

[Salman]

I think it was Mark Steyn who pointed out that polygamy has a larger constituency than gay marriage.

[jdege]

From Kopel:

On pages 60-62 of the Brown opinion are excerpts from the Court’s questioning of the attorney defending the statute. Based on the attorney’s answers, if X+A are married, and they cohabit with B then C then D, there will be no prosecution. (E.g., there’s no legal problem with having a transitory series of live-in mistresses.) Nor is there a legal problem if X says “I intend to be committed to this woman [B], I will take care of her and her children for as long as she lives.” But if X says that he will take care of B for as long as she lives because X and B consider themselves to be married, then that’s a crime.

To Judge Waddroup, this takes the case out of the Reynolds and Employment Division v. Smith (1990) rule that facially neutral statutes are not a Free Exercise violation, even if they interfere with the exercise of somebody’s religious beliefs. Rather, the case is now like Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993) (municipal ban on certain types of killing of animals was facially neutral, but was a First Amendment Free Exercise violation because it was aimed at Santeria religious ceremonies).

By policy, Utah rarely prosecutes persons who cohabitate for religious reasons, but Utah does reserve the discretion to do so when it wants. The Court finds a 14th Amendment Due Process violation here, based on a application of Lawrence v. Texas (states cannot criminalize oral or anal sex between consenting adults), the rational basis test, and other modern 14th Amendment doctrine. For example:

Adultery, including adulterous cohabitation, is not prosecuted. Religious cohabitation, however, is subject to prosecution at the limitless discretion of local and State prosecutors, despite a general policy not to prosecute religiously motivated polygamy. The court finds no rational basis to distinguish between the two, not least with regard to the State interest in protecting the institution of marriage.

One of the best ways to attract prosecutorial attention in Utah is to be a highly visible advocate for the plural lifestyle of one’s family. That is precisely what happened to the Browns, who are the subjects of the TLC reality TV series “Sister Wives.” (New season starts Dec. 29.) Going on national television week after week led to lots of government investigations of them, and to threats of prosecution which forced them to move from Utah to Nevada.

[daniel1212]

Freedom not Sodom!

There's freedom in America, the land of the red white and blue;

but there still must be laws, things you just can't do.

You can't marry your sister, your brother, or the family pet;

a sheep, or a goat - at least not yet!

That how is it with homosexuality, what the Bible calls sodomy;

men lying with men as with women, is perversity!

That they're not designed that way, tis easy to perceive,

but yielding to sinful desires, man is soon deceived.

A moral wrong is not a civil right; like the sin itself, that's confusion;

calling evil good and exchanging light for darkness, is sure delusion!

History tells us where this will lead, from societies now in dust,

When a nation casts off the laws of God, and follows it's own lusts.

Promoting a sin which sends one to Hell from an early grave,

dishonors God and robs man of the Life He gave.

There's but one answer: the Risen Jesus gave Himself for our sins;

Repent and believe, then truly follow Him!

[daniel1212]

The LDS Church wants to be thought of a mainstream Christian organization, but if they allow/support plural marriages by their members, that would obviously put them far out of the mainstream. But if they continue to forbid polygamy by their members, they will be exposed.

They have much been here.

[ReformationFan]

Yep. “Polyphobia!” Then “Incestophobia”! Then “Zoophobia”! Finally, “Pedophobia”! It’s getting worse and worse.

[NKP_Vet]

“Sorry, but his reasoning is sound, and no justification for calling him a liberal”

Nominated by George W. Bush, who’s for every conservative he got on the court he got a liberal, i.e. Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts, and Roberts will turn out to be the “swing vote” when the Court says that sodomite “marriage” is the law of the land. I think we all know why.

http://judgepedia.org/Clark_Waddoups

[Elsie]

Genesis 13:13

Now the men of Sodom were wicked and were sinning greatly against the LORD.

Genesis 18:20-21
20. Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous
21. that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

Genesis 19:4-7
4. Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house.
5. They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6. Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him
7. and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.

Psalms 12:8 The wicked freely strut about when what is vile is honored among men.

Isaiah 3:9 The look on their faces testifies against them; they parade their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them! They have brought disaster upon themselves.

2 Peter 2:13b Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.

Ezekiel 16:49-50
49. "`Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.
50. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

---

---

2 Peter 2

1. But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
3. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
4. For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;
5. if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;
6. if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
7. and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men
8. (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)--
9. if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
10. This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority. Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings;
11. yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord.
12. But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish.
13. They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.

---

---

But there IS hope!!!

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

9. Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived:
Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
10. nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

---

If you could NOT change, you would be in most pitiful shape...
 

 

 

 

 

[NKP_Vet]

“I reckon my faith is still going to look at it as a Sacrament no matter what the state says about it. Nothing the state does can devalue a Sacrament”.

You’re right, but the Supreme Court can damn sure say that churches can no longer “discriminate” against sodomite “marriage” because they (the Supreme Court) has made it the law of the land and Churches have to “marry” them or close down. It’s right around the corner.

[EternalVigilance]

The judge needs to be immediately impeached and removed for usurping the God-given, unalienable right of We the People of the United States to govern ourselves in a republican form of government.

And if our “representatives” will not do this, we must immediately get new representatives.

[sport]

It is the natural progression of events. If two men or two omen can “marry” each other, then anything is possible. Infant and adult. Animal and human. Human and inate object, ect.

[Ransomed]

I agree, it’s all about punishing those who they know are never going to accept ‘gay marriage’ or whatever impossibility the state decides to call marriage at the time. It’s not about getting everyone to accept ‘gay marriage.’ Although that is a useful thing to the state, as more people are conditioned to accept whatever the state decides to call marriage there will be more broken people who need the state.

It’s the stick that they will never have to put down. Pope Leo XIII warned about this 130 years ago.

Freegards