Polygamous Montana trio applies for wedding license for husband and his two "wives"

[Iceweasel]

Seems odd

Polygamy is practiced primarily by Mormons in this country
Mormons helped lead the political fight against Same Sex Marriage (See Prop 8)

Yet, Homosexuals are now being blamed for polygamy

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You people are depressingly stupid. If the polygamists claim equal protection, they will claim it against monogamy, not against same sex monogamy.

btw, the polygamists went to Court over this in the 19th century. Are you blaming that on gay marriage too?

Your stupidity isn't my problem, why would that be depressing? Your excuse is "it's against the law". Too dense to understand homosexual marriage was against the law but now isn't. so why not include three people that love each other. Hint: it would require changing the law like gay marriage. There must be a coloring book version online for you.

Interracial marriage was against the law. Is that what led to same sex marriage being made legal...legalizing interracial marriage?

Interracial marriage bans in some states treated men differently by government based on race. Last I checked, homosexuality wasn't a race but a behavior. The argument is that two men together is somehow equal to a man and woman. Wrong.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Seems odd

Polygamy is practiced primarily by Mormons in this country
Mormons helped lead the political fight against Same Sex Marriage (See Prop 8)

Yet, Homosexuals are now being blamed for polygamy

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You people are depressingly stupid. If the polygamists claim equal protection, they will claim it against monogamy, not against same sex monogamy.

btw, the polygamists went to Court over this in the 19th century. Are you blaming that on gay marriage too?

Your stupidity isn't my problem, why would that be depressing? Your excuse is "it's against the law". Too dense to understand homosexual marriage was against the law but now isn't. so why not include three people that love each other. Hint: it would require changing the law like gay marriage. There must be a coloring book version online for you.

Interracial marriage was against the law. Is that what led to same sex marriage being made legal...legalizing interracial marriage?

Interracial marriage bans in some states treated men differently by government based on race. Last I checked, homosexuality wasn't a race but a behavior. The argument is that two men together is somehow equal to a man and woman. Wrong.

Whether it's a race or a behavior is irrelevant.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

 

[Pop23]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

That's the weakest argument ever made

Are you really that stupid?

 

[Iceweasel]

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You people are depressingly stupid. If the polygamists claim equal protection, they will claim it against monogamy, not against same sex monogamy.

btw, the polygamists went to Court over this in the 19th century. Are you blaming that on gay marriage too?

Your stupidity isn't my problem, why would that be depressing? Your excuse is "it's against the law". Too dense to understand homosexual marriage was against the law but now isn't. so why not include three people that love each other. Hint: it would require changing the law like gay marriage. There must be a coloring book version online for you.

Interracial marriage was against the law. Is that what led to same sex marriage being made legal...legalizing interracial marriage?

Interracial marriage bans in some states treated men differently by government based on race. Last I checked, homosexuality wasn't a race but a behavior. The argument is that two men together is somehow equal to a man and woman. Wrong.

Whether it's a race or a behavior is irrelevant.

To you perhaps. To the lucid mind they aren't the same or equal.

 

[Iceweasel]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

That's the weakest argument ever made

Are you really that stupid?

Answer...yes. We can't consider it because it isn't legal. LOL

 

[rightwinger]

Seems odd

Polygamy is practiced primarily by Mormons in this country
Mormons helped lead the political fight against Same Sex Marriage (See Prop 8)

Yet, Homosexuals are now being blamed for polygamy

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You mean they had no case until Loving v Virginia 50 years ago or the 14th Amendment 150 years ago

For some reason that groundbreaking case did not immediately result in same sex marriage or polygamy

 

[Freewill]

i have already submitted an application to marry the 30ft tall palm tree in my front lawn.

The standard argument against that is that "marriage" can only be between sentient, consenting beings.

Meaning, your case will take longer to get through the courts and approved.

What law states that?

It is his right to marry a tree.

 

[Freewill]

Seems odd

Polygamy is practiced primarily by Mormons in this country
Mormons helped lead the political fight against Same Sex Marriage (See Prop 8)

Yet, Homosexuals are now being blamed for polygamy

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You mean they had no case until Loving v Virginia 50 years ago or the 14th Amendment 150 years ago

For some reason that groundbreaking case did not immediately result in same sex marriage or polygamy

You mean the case between a MAN and a Woman?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

That's the weakest argument ever made

Are you really that stupid?

Pop's "logic". Two gay people can legally marry so now three of more straight people can. Pop, there are only two blanks for names on the license, which can now be Adam and Steve. That's as far as it goes currently.

 

[Pop23]

Seems odd

Polygamy is practiced primarily by Mormons in this country
Mormons helped lead the political fight against Same Sex Marriage (See Prop 8)

Yet, Homosexuals are now being blamed for polygamy

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You mean they had no case until Loving v Virginia 50 years ago or the 14th Amendment 150 years ago

For some reason that groundbreaking case did not immediately result in same sex marriage or polygamy

News flash, males married females.

 

[Pop23]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

That's the weakest argument ever made

Are you really that stupid?

Pop's "logic". Two gay people can legally marry so now three of more straight people can. Pop, there are only two blanks for names on the license, which can now be Adam and Steve. That's as far as it goes currently.

You are an idiot. Forms are easily changed.

 

[Pop23]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

That's the weakest argument ever made

Are you really that stupid?

Pop's "logic". Two gay people can legally marry so now three of more straight people can. Pop, there are only two blanks for names on the license, which can now be Adam and Steve. That's as far as it goes currently.

Good god, PMH ACTUALLY IS ARGUING TRADITIONAL VALUES?????

 

[ChrisL]

Seems odd

Polygamy is practiced primarily by Mormons in this country
Mormons helped lead the political fight against Same Sex Marriage (See Prop 8)

Yet, Homosexuals are now being blamed for polygamy

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You people are depressingly stupid. If the polygamists claim equal protection, they will claim it against monogamy, not against same sex monogamy.

btw, the polygamists went to Court over this in the 19th century. Are you blaming that on gay marriage too?

Your stupidity isn't my problem, why would that be depressing? Your excuse is "it's against the law". Too dense to understand homosexual marriage was against the law but now isn't. so why not include three people that love each other. Hint: it would require changing the law like gay marriage. There must be a coloring book version online for you.

Interracial marriage was against the law. Is that what led to same sex marriage being made legal...legalizing interracial marriage?

Interracial marriage bans in some states treated men differently by government based on race. Last I checked, homosexuality wasn't a race but a behavior. The argument is that two men together is somehow equal to a man and woman. Wrong.

I guess some people just don't care about that kind of thing. People want to marry for their own reasons. They aren't hurting anyone else, and there is absolutely no LOGICAL reason to deny them the right to marry whomever they want for whatever reason they want. As long as both are consenting adults, it doesn't really matter. People should be able to make their own choices about their own lives and do what makes them happy, not what makes others happy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How many states currently have legally recognized polygamy?

That's the weakest argument ever made

Are you really that stupid?

Are you aware that polygamous marriage can be made legal at the state level?

 

[Iceweasel]

Idiot, they HAD NO CASE, until the USSC opened that door. Now there is now reasonable legal argument against it.

As stated before after you quoted the ignorant statement by John Stewart, polygamy is more a biologically sound relationship for males than monogamy.

Marriage between 1 man and 1 women kept that in check, now there is no argument.

Congrats SSM advocates, you opened that door and it will not be closed

You people are depressingly stupid. If the polygamists claim equal protection, they will claim it against monogamy, not against same sex monogamy.

btw, the polygamists went to Court over this in the 19th century. Are you blaming that on gay marriage too?

Your stupidity isn't my problem, why would that be depressing? Your excuse is "it's against the law". Too dense to understand homosexual marriage was against the law but now isn't. so why not include three people that love each other. Hint: it would require changing the law like gay marriage. There must be a coloring book version online for you.

Interracial marriage was against the law. Is that what led to same sex marriage being made legal...legalizing interracial marriage?

Interracial marriage bans in some states treated men differently by government based on race. Last I checked, homosexuality wasn't a race but a behavior. The argument is that two men together is somehow equal to a man and woman. Wrong.

I guess some people just don't care about that kind of thing. People want to marry for their own reasons. They aren't hurting anyone else, and there is absolutely no LOGICAL reason to deny them the right to marry whomever they want for whatever reason they want. As long as both are consenting adults, it doesn't really matter. People should be able to make their own choices about their own lives and do what makes them happy, not what makes others happy.

There is a logical reason. My health insurance went way up as soon as the state adopted gay partnership even before marriage came about because spouses are covered. Married couples got a package deal and the trade off is that it's how society exists, heterosexuals having kids, raising them and family rates to include them all.

Gays don't make kids so they get the bennies but with no up side to society by producing more earners, tax payers and future customers of their own. I don't care what it's called but I didn't want to subsidize it.

But using your logic, how can you deny three people, shouldn't matter to you, right?

 

[rightwinger]

There is nothing stopping polygamists from doing the exact same thing homosexuals did

1. Get Polygamy legalized
2. Go state by state to get it legalized
3. Win over the hearts and minds of the American People
4. Get the courts to agree with you

It only took gays 50 years since Loving v Virginia

 

[Iceweasel]

Are you aware that polygamous marriage can be made legal at the state level?

And recognized elsewhere? Nope. But the Supremes are now deciding state law. Polygamy will make it to them and it will be interesting what argument they can use against it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

(I predict) here's how this works:

These three get their marriage application refused, citing state law. They appeal to the state courts, the court rejects their appeal citing state law and/or the state constitution. They appeal to federal district court, the court rejects them citing Reynolds v. United States. They appeal to the Supreme Court, the court chooses not to hear it, letting the federal district ruling stand.

lol, I am not a lawyer. Neither are you all.

 

[ChrisL]

You people are depressingly stupid. If the polygamists claim equal protection, they will claim it against monogamy, not against same sex monogamy.

btw, the polygamists went to Court over this in the 19th century. Are you blaming that on gay marriage too?

Your stupidity isn't my problem, why would that be depressing? Your excuse is "it's against the law". Too dense to understand homosexual marriage was against the law but now isn't. so why not include three people that love each other. Hint: it would require changing the law like gay marriage. There must be a coloring book version online for you.

Interracial marriage was against the law. Is that what led to same sex marriage being made legal...legalizing interracial marriage?

Interracial marriage bans in some states treated men differently by government based on race. Last I checked, homosexuality wasn't a race but a behavior. The argument is that two men together is somehow equal to a man and woman. Wrong.

I guess some people just don't care about that kind of thing. People want to marry for their own reasons. They aren't hurting anyone else, and there is absolutely no LOGICAL reason to deny them the right to marry whomever they want for whatever reason they want. As long as both are consenting adults, it doesn't really matter. People should be able to make their own choices about their own lives and do what makes them happy, not what makes others happy.

There is a logical reason. My health insurance went way up as soon as the state adopted gay partnership even before marriage came about because spouses are covered. Married couples got a package deal and the trade off is that it's how society exists, heterosexuals having kids, raising them and family rates to include them all.

Gays don't make kids so they get the bennies but with no up side to society by producing more earners, tax payers and future customers of their own. I don't care what it's called but I didn't want to subsidize it.

But using your logic, how can you deny three people, shouldn't matter to you, right?

So what? They would be a very small minority of the entire population. You act as if, if this was made legal, suddenly everyone would choose a polygamous/polyandrous marriage, and that is just not the case.

Edit: Or gay marriage, also a very small minority of the entire population. People aren't going to suddenly turn gay because gay marriage is made legal. These people already probably live together anyways.