There's a group of polygamy activists in Maine. See TruthBearer.org, which has no connection to Utah.
But that's beside the point. If the groundwork is laid that rejects marriage between a man and a woman, it doesn't matter how many people or states advocate an alternative marriage. It only takes one successful suit based on the reasoning of Lawrence v. Texas.
The movement to legalize polygamy on that basis has already begun. See my post #237. A lawsuit has already been filed. More will come, until they prove successful.
To quote Pro-polygamy.com: "'Polygamy rights' are coming. Free at last. Free at last. Great God Almighty, we'll be free at last!"
The one thing that was standing in the way of this "freedom" was the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Yep, and we can have polyhomo unions too.
I remember when the gay 'purists' debated the bi-sexuals in the 1980s. The 'purists' semmed to win a the time, but we all know how that one turned out.
I stand corrected, there are indeed religious whack-jobs in Maine who justify this on pseudo-religious grounds. But they need an especially woman-bashing form of twisted Christianity to maintain subservience of the women involved. Is is safe for me to say that no one here who calls themselves Christian would accept this group's teachings as valid? What do you think their chances are to "spread their faith" in a state that elected Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe to the US Senate?
I guess if you look hard enough on the Internet, you can find some fringy group (or an individual masquerading as a group) to advocate anything. Just because the Internet has become the 21st Century's version of the graffiti wall in the men's bathroom, doesn't give the ideas presented any credibility.
The movement to legalize polygamy on that basis has already begun. See my post #237. A lawsuit has already been filed
Just as any fool with a computer can post something on the Internet, any fool with a law degree can assert whatever they want in a case brief. Find a judge who goes along with the "reasoning" being used, and I'll agree we have a problem, namely, a judge who needs to be removed.
The one thing that was standing in the way of this "freedom" was the Federal Marriage Amendment.
No, the thing standing in their way is the good sense of people who abhor polygamy. Even the feminazis who defended Clinton's use of Monica and the others, have no stomach to push polygamy, especially where it involves pseudo-Biblical justifications.