During the course of the discussions on legalizing gay marriage I raised the issue of equal protection and human rights for polygamists.

Here comes Polygamy..


Reality-TV star Kody Brown and his “sister wives” may not intend to be an example of the “slippery slope” in the gay-marriage debate, but their new lawsuit against Utah’s anti-polygamy laws bolsters the argument that legalizing marriage for same-sex couples could open the door to recognition of other kinds of marriages.

Mr. Brown; his legal wife, Meri Brown; and “sister wives” Janelle Brown, Christine Brown and Robyn Sullivan, who appear with their 16 children on “Sister Wives” on TLC, want Utah’s anti-polygamy laws declared unconstitutional and unenforceable on their “plural family.”

The legal arguments their attorneys Jonathan Turley and Adam Alba are using are similar to those used in many gay-marriage lawsuits: The Browns are being illegally denied the rights to freedom of association, due process and equal protection, as well as the rights of adults to engage in “intimate conduct” without government intrusion.

Utah’s anti-polygamy laws have caused “personal injuries” to the Brown family and trample on “the right of consenting adults to create a family environment of their choosing,” Mr. Turley and Mr. Alba argued in their July 13 complaint at U.S. District Court in Utah.

The lawsuit, which names Utah Gov. Gary R. Herbert and other state officials as defendants, seeks relief for the Brown family, and, “by extension, thousands of unorthodox or non-traditional families in Utah.”

In the Brown lawsuit, Mr. Turley and Mr. Alba said the Brown family, members of the Apostolic United Brethren faith, has committed no crime except to live together, “motivated by their sincere religious beliefs and love for one another.”

States cannot “criminalize consensual intimate relationships, including homosexual relationships, between unmarried adults,” the lawyers wrote, citing the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jul/24/gay-marriage-foes-cite-polygamy-suit/

Amid all the wierdnessnes embraced by many Mormons, polygamy is probably the least interesting to me. I don't give a rat's azz how many spouses a person wants to have. I just don't care.

While I don't see polygamy as the same as same sex marriage, if they want it legalized, let them work toward getting it legalized. It doesn't affect me either way.

Truth is, polygamist families are often riddled with brainwashing, abuse, and sometimes even incest. Often, having so many wives gives a man a sense of power or entitlement. Other times, the wives fight for attention. Most societies which still maintain polygamy actually tend to favor the man over the woman. Plus there are the effects on children, and those who use religion as a shield to defend their polygamist lifestyle.

In truth, polygamy is more harmful to individuals, families, and society than homosexuals have ever been. Polygamy is an ego trip which most often goes horribly wrong. To legalize it would be a step backwards, not a step forward, unlike same sex marriages.

I have no issue with polygamy or polyamorous people as long as they are coupling with of age wives and husbands who are of mental competency also.

So let them all marry and we should be charging a good bit for licenses and tests so we can coup some more revenue to get out of debt.

I don't see why any two people or for that matter any number and mix
of sexes can't get married if we are not going to make any
distinction. Say two elderly sisters or brothers etc.

It's only a method for allotment of property and other joint rights.
So what big deal. Let the polygamists and polyamorous have their
extended families too.

LOL

Seems it always relates to incest with some people

Don't get the connection.

But why should we care who marries who as long as they are of age and mental consent. Let the judges sort it out if the marriage doesn't work. Lots of divorce revenue in those cases too.

It is a common problem with elderly brothers and sisters who are
close and want each other to be involved in their health care and
financial inheritance without taxation. Has nothing to do with
incest - except in the mind of Dragoness.



You ought to slap your head. What the heck are you thinking of?

Oh good!!! whew.

I am glad I read it wrong.

That doesn't make sense that they would need marriage to do that though.

Same sense as any other marriage.

Not needed though.

They just need to sign power of attorney and other docs to make it happen.

That's not true for spousal inheritance benefits for example and
there may be many other spousal benefits. Right to be on the other's
insurance for instance...So No it is not the exactly the same.

Tbey don't need spousal benefits anyway that is what they get from their own spouse.

They don't have other spouses!

The point is if you are going to make spousal benefits generally
available then to be fair anyone ought to be able to access them
for their own concept of family and designate whomever they wish
to get their social security spousal benefit, retirement spousal
benefit, spousal tax exemption, spousal medical and child rights.

I say go ahead - have at it. Let anyone marry anyone else and as
many as they like!

That is not the governments fault that the brother and brother did not marry someone like they had the option of doing.

Brother and sister can get family benefits if there are any, no spousal that is just stupid.

Perhaps not because then the non-legal 'wives' would not be sucking the welfare system dry.

Let the husbands support all his wives instead of putting them on welfare as unmarried mothers.

I get the impression people haven't kept abreast of recent polygamy cases...

How recent? How many 'unmarried wives' are collecting welfare. I don't really know. Do you?

But if it was legal they couldn't get welfare unless the government went after the husband. So in a way it would make the father in these cases responsible and maybe he wouldn't want so many wives.

this