Why is gay marriage legal, but not polygamy?

[Freewill]

It can be made compatible. Why do you hate polygamy ?

It could be. We could, state by state, create a patchwork of brand new precedent to answer questions that are unique to polygamy. It would take decades, but its totally possible. However, the incompatibility with our marriage laws would be a logical reason to not recognize plural marriages if we chose to.

Where with same sex marriage, no such imcompatibility exists. Nor has existed since 2 person marriage was recognized as a joining of equals. The moment men and women were recognized as equals in a marriage.....same sex marriage was inevitable. As all the same rules apply.

Here is from PA just to pick a state that is kinda red/and blue

Marriage License in Pennsylvania
The Marriage License Bureau is part of the Clerk of the Orhpans' Court and Register of Wills. The following are the legal requirements for obtaining a marriage license in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

When to apply:

• Minimum of three business days and/or up to a maximum of60 days prior to the marriage ceremony.
• There is a three (business) day waiting period for issuance of the actual license.

Where to apply:

• Office of the Clerk of Orphans' Court of any County of Pennsylvania.

What is required:

• Both applicants must be present to apply.
  
• Applicants must be 18 years of age in order to apply for a marriage license. This rule applies to both male and female applicants. Applicants between 16-18 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian to provide written consent to the marriage. Applicants under 16 years of age must have both the written approval of a judge of theOrphans' Court Division of the Common Pleas AND a parent or legal guardian given written consent.
  
• Social Security Numbers are REQUIRED at the time of application.
  
• Drivers license or Photo ID for applicants
  
• Visas are required for citizens of another country

it would seem that there is no direct prohibition against polygamy except where it says "both." Interestingly enough if that were to be the argument then where it says the rule applies to male and female applicant that would seem to indicate a ban on gay marriage. So no there is no ban that would stand the SCOTUS standard concerning polygamy.

Pennsylvania it is. So riddle me this: there's a 3 person marriage. One person wants out. Does that mean that the marriage of all 3 is dissolved? Or just the party leaving?

Using Pennsylvania marriage law, answer that question.

You'll find you can't. As Pennsylvania marriage law has no instance in their marriage law where one member of a marriage is divorced while the other is still married. And thus no answers to questions that arise under such a situation

Why is it beyond your comprehension that a law can be changed ? It happens all the time.

Yep, the SCOTUS did it twice this week alone.

 

[Freewill]

Why was polygamy ever illegal?

The LDS Church was pressured by the federal government to end polygamy after Utah acquired statehood. I don't remember what year but it's been decades. The thing is, polygamy is still practiced in Utah. There's a tremendous amount of private wealth in Utah, and much of it in the hands of the LDS Church, specifically the Quorum of Twelve who run the state, censor the media and keep their flock like mushrooms in a damp, dark cave...lots of manure piled to keep them happy and stupid.

Didn't really answer my question.

Sort of a stupid question. Why don't you Google something instead of being a mushroom?

I see, you don't know.

 

[dilloduck]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?

Thoughts?

LMAO!!!! Can I still do that? Polygamy IS illegal, you freak. The LDS Church outlawed it years ago. Bahahahahaaaaa........

So was same sex. The arguments for polygamy are the same as same sex, and I see no way the ruling would not also be the same, correct?

No, they aren't. As there is no question our current marriage laws can't answer regarding same sex marriage. While there are questions that arise under polygamy that our marriage laws can't answer.

And you've already admitted it, insisting we'd need to go outside marriage laws and into business law to find those answers. Demonstrating the fundamental incompatibility I've described. While you don't have to go outside of marriage law with same sex marriage. Every situation that arises in same sex marriage can be handled by our marriage laws.

This has been true since the moment men and women were considered equals in marriage. Since that moment, no incompatibility with same sex marriage has existed.

Just look at you trying to deny polygamists the right to marry who the love. What the hell is the difference ?

 

[Silhouette]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?

Thoughts?

LMAO!!!! Can I still do that? Polygamy IS illegal, you freak. The LDS Church outlawed it years ago. Bahahahahaaaaa........

No, it isn't. Utah has decriminalized it thanks to the Brown family's lawsuit.

So was same sex. The arguments for polygamy are the same as same sex, and I see no way the ruling would not also be the same, correct?

No, they are not. Polygamy has been practiced one way: men taking on multiple wives, and not the reverse. It discriminates against women, just like the 19th century laws in the U.S. forbade a woman to own property. Try again.

YOU'RE ARGUING TRADITION?

How damn cute....How's it feel to be a bigot?

Pop, note that polygamy was decriminalized in Utah recently, so your position has even more merit. Keep up the good work and don't back down.

A judge has ruled that parts of Utah's law banning polygamy are unconstitutional, effectively decriminalizing the practice, in a victory for the family that appears in the reality TV show 'Sister Wives'....Kody Brown, who stars in the TLC reality show with his four wives, filed a lawsuit against the state after leaving Utah fearing prosecution after the programme aired....Now a federal judge has issued his final ruling in the case that strikes down parts of the state's anti-polygamy law... Polygamy effectively decriminalized in Utah as judge strikes down ban in victory for family that appears in TV show Sister Wives Daily Mail Online

 

[dilloduck]

Now we just need to get rid of those oppressive age of consent laws. Our youth have rights.

 

[Pop23]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?

Thoughts?

LMAO!!!! Can I still do that? Polygamy IS illegal, you freak. The LDS Church outlawed it years ago. Bahahahahaaaaa........

No, it isn't. Utah has decriminalized it thanks to the Brown family's lawsuit.

So was same sex. The arguments for polygamy are the same as same sex, and I see no way the ruling would not also be the same, correct?

No, they are not. Polygamy has been practiced one way: men taking on multiple wives, and not the reverse. It discriminates against women, just like the 19th century laws in the U.S. forbade a woman to own property. Try again.

YOU'RE ARGUING TRADITION?

How damn cute....How's it feel to be a bigot?

Pop, note that polygamy was decriminalized in Utah recently, so your position has even more merit. Keep up the good work and don't back down.

A judge has ruled that parts of Utah's law banning polygamy are unconstitutional, effectively decriminalizing the practice, in a victory for the family that appears in the reality TV show 'Sister Wives'....Kody Brown, who stars in the TLC reality show with his four wives, filed a lawsuit against the state after leaving Utah fearing prosecution after the programme aired....Now a federal judge has issued his final ruling in the case that strikes down parts of the state's anti-polygamy law... Polygamy effectively decriminalized in Utah as judge strikes down ban in victory for family that appears in TV show Sister Wives Daily Mail Online

Back down from what?

I've been making this case for over two years now. Now it's coming true as I predicted. Not as though it wasn't hard to see coming.

It is odd though how those that fought for equality want to desperately want to keep the number of two as the reason to exclude multiple marriage when that number is only applicable because of.....


Wait for it.........



PROCREATION


That's thrown out the window now as was pointed out by the USSC ruling. It's now only about love.

 

[Pop23]

Now we just need to get rid of those oppressive age of consent laws. Our youth have rights.

I don't see that, consent laws will still apply, but to gay same sex siblings beyond the age of consent? Don't see the argument against it. You

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?

Thoughts?

Look at the supreme court decision in Reynolds VS U.S and you will see that polygamy is going to be legal. as it should be. I don't want two wives, but who cares if someone else does.

 

[dilloduck]

Liberals care----they don't want their SSMs tainted by religious perverts.

 

[Silhouette]

...lol...good one.

 

[Silhouette]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?
Thoughts?

Look at the supreme court decision in Reynolds VS U.S and you will see that polygamy is going to be legal. as it should be. I don't want two wives, but who cares if someone else does.

The voting public. But now that they're no longer able to regulate the word "marriage" or behaviors for that matter, their votes don't count. Thanks SCOTUS...

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?

Thoughts?

Polygamy doesn't push the communist agenda as well as the issue of gay marriage. That is just a plain fact which is why polygamist cults won't get any positive news attention. In fact, if it doesn't push the socialist agenda your local newspapers won't cover it at all.

 

[Slyhunter]

I know it would be big-o-me to take on another wife...

Can you imagine having three or four on the curse at the same time? They synchronize ya know....Yikes!

You do like he did in Big Love, put them in separate homes.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?
Thoughts?

Look at the supreme court decision in Reynolds VS U.S and you will see that polygamy is going to be legal. as it should be. I don't want two wives, but who cares if someone else does.

The voting public. But now that they're no longer able to regulate the word "marriage" or behaviors for that matter, their votes don't count. Thanks SCOTUS...

Their votes were never supposed to count in the first place. The rights of others aren't up for a vote of the people. We are not a democracy. Learn it and accept it.

 

[Pop23]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?
Thoughts?

Look at the supreme court decision in Reynolds VS U.S and you will see that polygamy is going to be legal. as it should be. I don't want two wives, but who cares if someone else does.

The voting public. But now that they're no longer able to regulate the word "marriage" or behaviors for that matter, their votes don't count. Thanks SCOTUS...

Their votes were never supposed to count in the first place. The rights of others are up for a vote of the people. We are not a democracy. Learn it and accept it.

Read what you wrote, it makes no sense.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?
Thoughts?

Look at the supreme court decision in Reynolds VS U.S and you will see that polygamy is going to be legal. as it should be. I don't want two wives, but who cares if someone else does.

The voting public. But now that they're no longer able to regulate the word "marriage" or behaviors for that matter, their votes don't count. Thanks SCOTUS...

Their votes were never supposed to count in the first place. The rights of others are up for a vote of the people. We are not a democracy. Learn it and accept it.

Read what you wrote, it makes no sense.

Fixed.

 

[hangover]

Is the Mormon church going to be the next decision for the SC?
Thoughts?

Look at the supreme court decision in Reynolds VS U.S and you will see that polygamy is going to be legal. as it should be. I don't want two wives, but who cares if someone else does.

The voting public. But now that they're no longer able to regulate the word "marriage" or behaviors for that matter, their votes don't count. Thanks SCOTUS...

Their votes were never supposed to count in the first place. The rights of others aren't up for a vote of the people. We are not a democracy. Learn it and accept it.

People voted for equal rights for EVERYONE in the constitution, including blacks, women AND gays. The court enforced what was already voted on by the people. If the states don't like the constitution, they shouldn't have ratified it long ago.

 

[Silhouette]

People voted for equal rights for EVERYONE in the constitution, including blacks, women AND gays. The court enforced what was already voted on by the people. If the states don't like the constitution, they shouldn't have ratified it long ago.

Wait, gays are just people doing homosexual acts. How is it that acts are protected under the Constitution again? Could you point me to that Amendment that says "just some but not other acts are protected by the Constitution"? I think I missed that in poli-sci..

Let's see...um blacks, born that way. Check. Women, born that way. Check. Gays, um...hmmm...

 

[Dragonlady]

It can be made compatible. Why do you hate polygamy ?

It could be. We could, state by state, create a patchwork of brand new precedent to answer questions that are unique to polygamy. It would take decades, but its totally possible. However, the incompatibility with our marriage laws would be a logical reason to not recognize plural marriages if we chose to.

Where with same sex marriage, no such imcompatibility exists. Nor has existed since 2 person marriage was recognized as a joining of equals. The moment men and women were recognized as equals in a marriage.....same sex marriage was inevitable. As all the same rules apply.

Here is from PA just to pick a state that is kinda red/and blue

Marriage License in Pennsylvania
The Marriage License Bureau is part of the Clerk of the Orhpans' Court and Register of Wills. The following are the legal requirements for obtaining a marriage license in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

When to apply:

• Minimum of three business days and/or up to a maximum of60 days prior to the marriage ceremony.
• There is a three (business) day waiting period for issuance of the actual license.

Where to apply:

• Office of the Clerk of Orphans' Court of any County of Pennsylvania.

What is required:

• Both applicants must be present to apply.
  
• Applicants must be 18 years of age in order to apply for a marriage license. This rule applies to both male and female applicants. Applicants between 16-18 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian to provide written consent to the marriage. Applicants under 16 years of age must have both the written approval of a judge of theOrphans' Court Division of the Common Pleas AND a parent or legal guardian given written consent.
  
• Social Security Numbers are REQUIRED at the time of application.
  
• Drivers license or Photo ID for applicants
  
• Visas are required for citizens of another country

it would seem that there is no direct prohibition against polygamy except where it says "both." Interestingly enough if that were to be the argument then where it says the rule applies to male and female applicant that would seem to indicate a ban on gay marriage. So no there is no ban that would stand the SCOTUS standard concerning polygamy.

Pennsylvania it is. So riddle me this: there's a 3 person marriage. One person wants out. Does that mean that the marriage of all 3 is dissolved? Or just the party leaving?

Using Pennsylvania marriage law, answer that question.

You'll find you can't. As Pennsylvania marriage law has no instance in their marriage law where one member of a marriage is divorced while the other is still married. And thus no answers to questions that arise under such a situation

Simple, same as is done today, all parties agree, which in this case would be 2 as one against one. Or the courts would decide as is done when any divorce is contested.

PA law, as shown, has no provisions for same sex marriage yet here we are.

There is no requirement under PA law that applicants must be one man and one woman, just the sentence that the rules are the same for both male and female applicants.

 

[Freewill]

It can be made compatible. Why do you hate polygamy ?

It could be. We could, state by state, create a patchwork of brand new precedent to answer questions that are unique to polygamy. It would take decades, but its totally possible. However, the incompatibility with our marriage laws would be a logical reason to not recognize plural marriages if we chose to.

Where with same sex marriage, no such imcompatibility exists. Nor has existed since 2 person marriage was recognized as a joining of equals. The moment men and women were recognized as equals in a marriage.....same sex marriage was inevitable. As all the same rules apply.

Here is from PA just to pick a state that is kinda red/and blue

Marriage License in Pennsylvania
The Marriage License Bureau is part of the Clerk of the Orhpans' Court and Register of Wills. The following are the legal requirements for obtaining a marriage license in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

When to apply:

• Minimum of three business days and/or up to a maximum of60 days prior to the marriage ceremony.
• There is a three (business) day waiting period for issuance of the actual license.

Where to apply:

• Office of the Clerk of Orphans' Court of any County of Pennsylvania.

What is required:

• Both applicants must be present to apply.
  
• Applicants must be 18 years of age in order to apply for a marriage license. This rule applies to both male and female applicants. Applicants between 16-18 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian to provide written consent to the marriage. Applicants under 16 years of age must have both the written approval of a judge of theOrphans' Court Division of the Common Pleas AND a parent or legal guardian given written consent.
  
• Social Security Numbers are REQUIRED at the time of application.
  
• Drivers license or Photo ID for applicants
  
• Visas are required for citizens of another country

it would seem that there is no direct prohibition against polygamy except where it says "both." Interestingly enough if that were to be the argument then where it says the rule applies to male and female applicant that would seem to indicate a ban on gay marriage. So no there is no ban that would stand the SCOTUS standard concerning polygamy.

Pennsylvania it is. So riddle me this: there's a 3 person marriage. One person wants out. Does that mean that the marriage of all 3 is dissolved? Or just the party leaving?

Using Pennsylvania marriage law, answer that question.

You'll find you can't. As Pennsylvania marriage law has no instance in their marriage law where one member of a marriage is divorced while the other is still married. And thus no answers to questions that arise under such a situation

Simple, same as is done today, all parties agree, which in this case would be 2 as one against one. Or the courts would decide as is done when any divorce is contested.

PA law, as shown, has no provisions for same sex marriage yet here we are.

There is no requirement under PA law that applicants must be one man and one woman, just the sentence that the rules are the same for both male and female applicants.

Of course sometimes things are written when the impossibility of marriage ever being considered anything other then between a man and woman is ever considered. The law doesn't say it is illegal for a shoe to marry a toaster because that is not going to happen. But here we are in a brave new world where traditions mean nothing. Long standing definitions are changed in a blink of an eye.

But the point is, that the law never consider marriage anything but between a man and woman, it didn't need said. You know the "intent" like the SCOTUS quoted for their usurp of power concerning ACA. So now, if all of a sudden were are going to take laws by the letter of the law and say it does not ban gay marriage, although it does say man and woman, then the precise reading indicates that there is no prohibition from anyone getting married or anyone and maybe anything.