If we warp the definition of marriage to allow gay marriage, then there is no logical, rational argument against polygamy. In fact, given that polygamous relationships produce children and have a much hardier historical pedigree than gay marriage, it’s a given that if gay marriage is legal, polygamy will be the next step down the slippery slope.
There are those now making that case in court, they’re on very firm ground, and if they lose in Utah, polygamy supporters will keep filing lawsuits in other states until they win. In fact, the only logical reason to deny them in a state that already allows gay marriage is that liberal judges may think it’ll detract from the acceptance of gay marriage and so they may put their thumb on the scale of justice TEMPORARILY.
A polygamous family has filed a lawsuit challenging an American state’s criminalisation of bigamy, citing a leading homosexual ruling from the Supreme Court.
One commentator responded to the news by describing the lawsuit as “a political gift” to groups in favour of retaining the traditional definition of marriage.
Traditional marriage supporters have warned that attempts to redefine marriage to allow same-sex unions would result in calls to legalise polygamy.
Now Kody Brown and his four ‘wives’ have filed a federal challenge against a law which criminalises bigamy in the American state of Utah.
The Browns’ lawyer claims the case is about privacy – following the principles of cases, like the 2003 Supreme Court case when judges ruled that homosexual acts in private were protected by the US constitution.
Mr Brown is only legally married to one of his ‘wives’. But like most polygamists in Utah he ‘married’ the other three women in religious ceremonies with the couples considering themselves to be “spiritually married”.
Just think: In 20 years, you’ll probably be accused of being a small minded bigot for raising a stink if your neighbor decides to marry a Doberman Pinscher or a Willow Tree.