[NKP_Vet]

So here is what we have here. This liberal activist judge could care less what the Supreme Court ruled in 1896, when it said Polygamy was illegal. So if this fruitcake can overrule the Supreme Court, it is only a matter of time before it goes back to the Supreme Court where Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts will side with the liberals and Polygamy will once again be not only legal in Utah, but it will also be the law of the land. Then it will be OK for some pervert that likes to sex with a dog to marry his dog. This is how backwards this country has became with the liberals that now control the US Supreme Court. If marriage is not legally defined as one man and one woman and nothing else, it means nothing anymore. Nothing at all. Sodomites have won, because the US Supreme Court is loaded with them. I am saying all this because if the case returns to the Supreme Court they will legalize Polygamy and every other type of degenerate activity you can think of.

[Stevenc131]

I’ve found one wife more than sufficient, I can’t imagine two or more in the house.

[GLDNGUN]

I have been waiting for this inevitable moment for a long time and have seen it coming for a long time. Pandora's Box is about to open for the LDS Church when polygamy is no longer a crime.

Going back to when the LDS Church quit practicing polygamy, there was NOT a revelation given forbidding the practice, only a "vision" the current "prophet" had of what would happen to the Church is they didn't stop the practice.

It was kind of a weasily way out of it because the "revelation" had been given to practice polygamy and previous prophets like Brigham Young said it was the only form of marriage practiced in heaven and the Church would NEVER abandon it on earth.

But then they saw the writing on the wall. Stop the practice or the federal government would pretty much dissolve the Church. The Mormons desperately wanted to be left alone and become a state so they agreed to stop the practice and had to put it into their state constitution that they would "never" re-instate it unless the federal government changed the law. This was put in there to placate the feds.

So, now, here we are. It's only a matter of time before polygamy is legal everywhere. The LDS church stopped the practice, not because they thought it was wrong or had a "revelation" that it was bad and to stop it, but merely to survive and obey the law. With survival and the law no longer a hindrance, on what basis will they tell their members that they can't practice polygamy?

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.

Many members will think "Ok, we firmly believed in God's command to have plural wives, but had to stop the practice or be irradicated. We stopped it to survive, but now that the government says it's ok, why wouldn't we continue with this practice that God had commanded?"

Leaves them in quite the pickle.

[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?

[wonkowasright]

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

[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.

[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.

[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!

[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.

[Alter Kaker]

Not a liberal activist. Judge Waddoups received his undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University in 1970 and his juris doctorate from the University of Utah’s law school in 1973. He was nominated by President George W. Bush and confirmed in 2008.

[little jeremiah]

Placemark

[trebb]

So here is what we have here. This liberal activist judge could care less what the Supreme Court ruled in 1896, when it said Polygamy was illegal. So if this fruitcake can overrule the Supreme Court, it is only a matter of time before it goes back to the Supreme Court where Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts will side with the liberals and Polygamy will once again be not only legal in Utah, but it will also be the law of the land. Then it will be OK for some pervert that likes to sex with a dog to marry his dog. This is how backwards this country has became with the liberals that now control the US Supreme Court. If marriage is not legally defined as one man and one woman and nothing else, it means nothing anymore. Nothing at all. Sodomites have won, because the US Supreme Court is loaded with them. I am saying all this because if the case returns to the Supreme Court they will legalize Polygamy and every other type of degenerate activity you can think of.

The slope has been iced - rationale based on prior bad decisions 9hjomosexual marriage/abortion, etc.) will be come the norm. Though I disagree with the guy's decision, I understand his rationale: If keeping one traditionally nonstandard from marrying and it is unconstitutional, then stopping any non-traditional set of prospective folks/beasts/objects is also unconstitutional.

The real point is that none of this bit about marriage has anything to do with the Constitution - the Constitution was subverted to allow that which should not be forced upon a Free People and to remove absolute rights that the very Constitution says are not to be infringed upon.

[windsorknot]

Another see-we-told-you-so moment.

[Jim Noble]

There is no argument, and especially no legal, constitutional, or Biblical argument, in favor of pretended homosexual marriages that is not a much more forceful argument for polygamy.

It’s a curious cultural artifact, nothing more, that homosexualism has preceded polygamy to the bar. In fact, since boys are no longer being socialized to become husbands, the current and future husband supply is quite constrained. Given the fact that 95 percent of girls still want to marry (or at least want a wedding), polygamy seems inevitable.

Of course, the arguments for the state to collaborate in pretend marriages are fatally flawed to begin with, but that’s another topic.

[IamConservative]

The slippery slope began when government became involved in marriage at all. Just quibbling over rate of descent now.