Federal judge strikes down part of Utah’s ban on polygamy


SALT LAKE CITY — A federal judge declared a portion of Utah’s polygamy ban unconstitutional late Wednesday, essentially decriminalizing polygamy in the state.

U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups ruled the phrase in the law “‘or cohabits with another person’ is a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is without a rational basis under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by reality TV polygamist Kody Brown and his wives, who left Utah fearing prosecution. They sued the state, arguing that the ban violated their right to freely practice their religion.

The ruling follows a similar order in December of last year that the judge took back while he decided the issue of damages. In the order, Judge Waddoups did preserve the phrases “marry” and “purports to marry” to “save the statute from being invalidated in its entirety.”



So where’s the “two consenting adults” crowd and all those who support gay “marriage” who promised to stand against this?




You surely can’t be surprised by this.

Next up, legalized incest.


Yeeeeeeeeessss! Exactly my thoughts! Where are all that said that was only two consenting adults and won’t go any further.

And where is all the crowd that said noooooo poligamy noooo never polygamy won’t be legalized after gay marriage…


And he-e-ere it comes!


Yep. I saw this news from a friend’s Facebook page. Though, given Utah’s history, I’m not at all surprised that they made polygamy “not illegal” before anyone else.


I do not get what the connection is to gay marriage. People have been fighting polygamy laws in Utah since before it was a state! This issue was here long before gay marriage.

Secondly, this ruling was made on completely different grounds from gay marriage! Gay marriage is being argued on equal protection; that is, that all people, gay or straight, deserve the same legal recognition. This was argued on the free exercise clause of the first amendment; that is, not allowing them to live together impeded their ability to freely practice their religion without government interference and that there is no good reason for that. And fundamental Mormons have argued this for 200 years.

Polygamy will never be recognized because it would be a logistical nightmare for the government and everyone else. But all sorts of romantic and platonic roommate situations are legally allowed-unless you are in a romantic relationship with more than one of them. That is strange, it does inhibit their religion, and since they aren’t asking for government recognition, it really doesn’t affect anyone else.

This is not to say that I agree with the ruling, I’m actually very torn. But it isn’t really accurate to link it to gay marriage.


Or even for a single adult, what’s to stop someone if they want to marry a horse? If it’s about the right to pursue happiness, anything goes.


It’s not surprising it was struck down, their laws on polygamy were stricter than any other state and didn’t just ban having a state issued marriage certificate to more than person at the same time. It basically made it illegal to live a polygamist lifesyle and to present yourself as married to more than one person. No other state has made that illegal nor has the federal government.


I’m waiting for 3-way marriages; i.e., MWW, WMM, MMM, WWW.

After all, it “isn’t fair” that if 3 “consenting adults” are “in love” that they shouldn’t be allowed to have a legalized menage-a-trois, right? (Relax, people. I’m saying this sarcastically" :D)


Because we have destroyed the understanding of what marriage is and why the state recognized it in the first place. Marriage is for the good of the family, the spouses, and for the children. In today’s society, marriage only means following the happiness of the spouses involved. Once marriage is only about personal happiness, then there are no rules anymore and everything is allowed.

The state recognized marriage to protect the wife and children of the marriage. The intact, stable 2-parent, family is the bedrock and foundation of society and civilization. When this is no longer recognized, society crumbles (as we have seen).

Gay “marriage” is one more assault on marriage, just as polygamy is as well. That is how they are connected.

That’s not the point. When gay “marriage” was argued, many of us could see what was coming, and predicted this. We were laughed, mocked and scorned for such “silly” ideas, and there was NO WAY that polygamy would be legal. We were fear-mongering, and trying to be mean to homosexuals, etc.

And yet, here we are. Our prediction is coming true. And it’s time to call on the carpet those who favor gay “marriage” who said this wouldn’t happen. They were wrong, and it needs to be acknowledged so that we can begin to repair our society.

This prediction will sadly be proven false, just as the predictions many made that polygamy wouldn’t be next after gay “marriage” was legalized.

It’s all an attack on the institution of marriage. The specific arguments might be different, but the issues are both bringing down marriage.


That’s not the way I remember it. In conversations I recall, what was rejected as fear-mongering was the prediction that the state would eventually sanction marriages between adults and children, or between humans and other animals, or between humans and their computers, or any number of other scenarios in which one or more of the participants could not give informed consent to the contract.


The next logical step in the secularist marriage argument is simple: no restrictions on who you can marry. I am 100% positive that we will see polygamous and polyandrous marriages in the next 15 years.


I am pretty sure I predicted here months ago that polygamy would be the next to be sanctioned. I’m not sure this is it, but I would say within the next 5 years it is very likely.


This isn’t even as bad as gay marriage. So yeah, no big deal.


You are right that it was different grounds but I think they had to use a different ground because poligamy was criminalized, gay marriage …well at least in my state MA which was the one who started…was never criminalized. With gay marriage it was not necesary todecriminalize it was just to make it a right hence equal protection. Poligamy is a crime so it needed a stronger argument. I think free exercise clause is a much better argument to decriminalize an activity and that is why the difference.

The link I see is that under the equal protection right it opens a door. Being decriminalized already the same argument can be done, we are all equal and we all deserve the same right to marriage so with narrowing to two people we are discriminating against people like the browns. I think the same arguments used for gay marriage can be used with poligamy so the fact that it opened the door is where the link is to me


Speaking of incest…

From the NY Daily News:

Georgia siblings charged with incest had sex three times after watching ‘The Notebook’: police

Two Georgia siblings admitted to police they had sex three times in a tractor trailer parked outside a church after watching “The Notebook,” cops said.

Christopher Buckner, 20, of Guyton, and her brother, Timothy Savoy, 25, of Jackson, were stopped by cops around 4:30 a.m. Tuesday walking down Highway 30 in Effingham County after a resident called about a possible prowler outside, the Savannah Morning News reported.

Savoy told police he was walking the woman home before cops learned the two were brother and sister and had just had sex in a Kentworth tractor trailer outside the Countryside Baptist Church, which sits across the road from South Effingham High School.

My question is if the ACLU will pick up the case?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.