I agree that the state should stay out of the marriage business. Most of the "rules" (at least in this country) were made by christians who wanted the state to enforce their idea of what a marriage should be.
Elections
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
tourists24
Well-Known Member
Well Im so glad you get to define the marriage process now Klein. What about the people who disagree with you? The definition (legally speaking) has been set for a long time. Only because of politics do we now need to expand on that. And why are your rules on loving just that one person right? If it has been wrong for all these years, then why shouldnt it be open to anyone wanting to marry anyone and as many as they want? cmon lets be open and fair
tourists24
Well-Known Member
and is that way in many cultures. I just wish the government would stay out of this entirely. Its actually none of their business
browndevil
Well-Known Member
Tourists, do you REALLY want to have multiple wives? If so, start a ballot measure, start the process, let's see if it's unconstitutional do deny polygamy. Let's see if it can be successfully argured in a court of law. Anyway, I think multiple wives is called "the other woman" in the US. Which I believe MOST marriages take a vow of fidelity. I'll let you all know I am going to a wedding today
My guess is one BIG reason polygamy is illegal in the US is eventually if these marriages break up the onus of the financial responsibility would be on the State in terms of welfare for the children. And that I agree
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
When you are at the wedding and it comes to the part of the ceremony when the priest asks if anyone objects to this marriage, you should stand up and say that, yes, I object, tourists24 thinks .... should be able to have more than one wife.
BTW, polygamy is legal in Utah. The Mormons have practiced polygamy for years although, having been married once, I have no idea why they would want to have more than one wife.
BTW, polygamy is legal in Utah. The Mormons have practiced polygamy for years although, having been married once, I have no idea why they would want to have more than one wife.
P
pickup
Guest
When you are at the wedding and it comes to the part of the ceremony when the priest asks if anyone objects to this marriage, you should stand up and say that, yes, I object, tourists24 thinks .... should be able to have more than one wife.
BTW, polygamy is legal in Utah. The Mormons have practiced polygamy for years although, having been married once, I have no idea why they would want to have more than one wife.
I hate to break the news to you. But polygamy is illegal in Utah. It was one of the stumbling blocks to that territory gaining the status of state. At about that time, one of the leaders of the church had a "vision" or talk from God that polygamy was no longer god's will , and this became the new policy of the Church of Latter Day saints. Many disagreed and formed breakaway churches.
P
pickup
Guest
On the subject of Polygamy, it seemed to be very popular in the old testament (King David and oh let's not forget Soloman). Suddenly, in the new testament, having more than one wife was considered adultery.
browndevil
Well-Known Member
browndevil
Well-Known Member
Yes, I like to remind my social conservative friends, wait I don't have any social conservatve friends, that marriage HAS NOT always been defined as one man one woman. And no it does not go back to the Bible as such. That is if you choose that book as your basic Tenet of how you live your life
browndevil
Well-Known Member
When you are at the wedding and it comes to the part of the ceremony when the priest asks if anyone objects to this marriage, you should stand up and say that, yes, I object, tourists24 thinks .... should be able to have more than one wife.
BTW, polygamy is legal in Utah. The Mormons have practiced polygamy for years although, having been married once, I have no idea why they would want to have more than one wife.
So no need to hit on the bride??????
moreluck
golden ticket member
Polygamy is NOT legal, just practiced in secret........
Furthermore, Mormon polygamy was never legal, at any time - not even in the Utah territory from 1847 to 1890.
Marriage is a legal contract between one man and one woman. There has never been a law enacted to allow otherwise. All the married Mormons who emigrated to Utah in 1847 had been married under the civil laws of their respective states; each one of those states had laws against bigamy, thus making monogamy the "common law."
The very reason Brigham Young chose to move to Utah, rather than Oregon, California, or Texas, as others suggested, was because Utah was an uninhabited "no man's land". However, the area was legally Mexican territory and polygamy was illegal in Mexico.
In the United States, marriage is a legal contract regulated by the various states. When the Mormons went to Utah in 1847, all married Mormons at that time had been married under laws of the states they had come from. Utah became U.S. territory in 1848 after the Mexican War, and thus all citizens living therein became subject to the common laws of the nation, including marriage laws. (To use an analogy, you get your drivers' license from your state, but it is recognized as being legal in all the states. Marriage licenses are similar.)
Once in Utah, Young attempted to establish the "Territory of Deseret," and operate the area as a theocracy, under the "Law of the Lord," which included plural marriage and blood atonement. However, Congress rejected Young's attempt, and in 1850, the area was officially established as Utah Territory, with territorial overseers appointed from Washington D.C.. President Millard Fillmore appointed Young as governor. Thus, polygamy became specifically illegal under U. S. common laws in 1850; but, since polygamy was also illegal under Mexican laws beforehand, there was never a time when polygamy was legal in Utah.
Furthermore, Mormon polygamy was never legal, at any time - not even in the Utah territory from 1847 to 1890.
Marriage is a legal contract between one man and one woman. There has never been a law enacted to allow otherwise. All the married Mormons who emigrated to Utah in 1847 had been married under the civil laws of their respective states; each one of those states had laws against bigamy, thus making monogamy the "common law."
The very reason Brigham Young chose to move to Utah, rather than Oregon, California, or Texas, as others suggested, was because Utah was an uninhabited "no man's land". However, the area was legally Mexican territory and polygamy was illegal in Mexico.
In the United States, marriage is a legal contract regulated by the various states. When the Mormons went to Utah in 1847, all married Mormons at that time had been married under laws of the states they had come from. Utah became U.S. territory in 1848 after the Mexican War, and thus all citizens living therein became subject to the common laws of the nation, including marriage laws. (To use an analogy, you get your drivers' license from your state, but it is recognized as being legal in all the states. Marriage licenses are similar.)
Once in Utah, Young attempted to establish the "Territory of Deseret," and operate the area as a theocracy, under the "Law of the Lord," which included plural marriage and blood atonement. However, Congress rejected Young's attempt, and in 1850, the area was officially established as Utah Territory, with territorial overseers appointed from Washington D.C.. President Millard Fillmore appointed Young as governor. Thus, polygamy became specifically illegal under U. S. common laws in 1850; but, since polygamy was also illegal under Mexican laws beforehand, there was never a time when polygamy was legal in Utah.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
August 14, 2010 1:00 pm
Just wanted to note the date and time when I said:
I WAS WRONG!!
I really thought polygamy was legal in Utah.
Just wanted to note the date and time when I said:
I WAS WRONG!!
I really thought polygamy was legal in Utah.
tourists24
Well-Known Member
I never said I was in favor of having multiple wives. What I AM saying is that there is only political motivation for trying to redefine marriage. There is only a motivation because some people want it changed to make it ok for same sex marriage. It has nothing to do with constitutional right. Marriage has been defined as the union of one man one woman for years and years; now all of a sudden it is wrong. If one man and one woman isnt good enough, then why is two people in general now the magic correct standard? If we have been wrong all along, why should marriage be limited? Why not make it legal for anyone wanting to marry for any reason?Tourists, do you REALLY want to have multiple wives? If so, start a ballot measure, start the process, let's see if it's unconstitutional do deny polygamy. Let's see if it can be successfully argured in a court of law. Anyway, I think multiple wives is called "the other woman" in the US. Which I believe MOST marriages take a vow of fidelity. I'll let you all know I am going to a wedding today
My guess is one BIG reason polygamy is illegal in the US is eventually if these marriages break up the onus of the financial responsibility would be on the State in terms of welfare for the children. And that I agree
And why not take it to the next logical level?
"Here, Lassie! Wanna get married girl?"
I mean, if you love your dog and she loves you, why not?
tourists24
Well-Known Member
exactly my point over..... if you remove limitations for one group, where does it end? and why should it end? we sure dont want to deny the supporters of beastiality their "rights" or offend them right?
P
pickup
Guest
looking at the history of miscegenation laws in the united states (look at how late some states turned the corner on this , and heck it took a supreme court decision in 1967 to finally declare so called anti miscegenation laws unconstitutional whereas the supreme court a century earlier ruled them constitutional). The 1967 case was Loving vs Virginia and it is a ruling that many advocates of same sex marriages are attempting to use to legalize what they want.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-miscegenation_laws
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia
klein
Für Meno :)
That would give a nice fat tax refund.
Spouse (lassie), not working, being a dependent as well.
That would give a nice fat tax refund.
Spouse (lassie), not working, being a dependent as well.
And maybe before you married Lassie, she had had a batch of puppies out of wedlock. You could now adopt those puppies as your own. Maybe seven new dependants for you!
tourists24
Well-Known Member
That would give a nice fat tax refund.
Spouse (lassie), not working, being a dependent as well.
Over, I cant believe you and Klein are being so dogaphobic......
