Slippery Slope Predicted?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

They already are. Families with a father in the home are not on public assistance so that wouldn’t be applicable. However, it is common practice among FLS to collect public assistance because the families are not technically wed.

Read “Under the banner of heaven” for a shocking look into FLS. I don’t know how accurate it is because the author certainly seems to have an ax to grind but it is a fascinating book. Same guy that wrote Into thin air, The pat Tillman story and Into the wild.
[/quote]

I own the book, and it is very accurate.

The Elizabeth Smart case consumed this state.

82

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

I was waiting for this to be posted. Lol, how many time was it said on here, polygamy is totally different than gay marriage, yada yada yada…

83

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

I was waiting for this to be posted. Lol, how many time was it said on here, polygamy is totally different than gay marriage, yada yada yada…
[/quote]

I only said that the gay marriage ruling would spawn other court fights for “equal marriage rights”

Nothing more.

84

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

They already are. Families with a father in the home are not on public assistance so that wouldn’t be applicable. However, it is common practice among FLS to collect public assistance because the families are not technically wed.

Read “Under the banner of heaven” for a shocking look into FLS. I don’t know how accurate it is because the author certainly seems to have an ax to grind but it is a fascinating book. Same guy that wrote Into thin air, The pat Tillman story and Into the wild.
[/quote]

I own the book, and it is very accurate.

The Elizabeth Smart case consumed this state.[/quote]

You have to admit, it is a pretty strange state around the Mormon strongholds. No where else have I had such an overwhelming feeling of “glad you could visit, time to go now”.

85

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

I was waiting for this to be posted. Lol, how many time was it said on here, polygamy is totally different than gay marriage, yada yada yada…
[/quote]

I only said that the gay marriage ruling would spawn other court fights for “equal marriage rights”

Nothing more.[/quote]

I agree and truthfully I don’t care what happens among consenting adults. Emphasis ADULTS

86

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

They already are. Families with a father in the home are not on public assistance so that wouldn’t be applicable. However, it is common practice among FLS to collect public assistance because the families are not technically wed.

Read “Under the banner of heaven” for a shocking look into FLS. I don’t know how accurate it is because the author certainly seems to have an ax to grind but it is a fascinating book. Same guy that wrote Into thin air, The pat Tillman story and Into the wild.
[/quote]

I own the book, and it is very accurate.

The Elizabeth Smart case consumed this state.[/quote]

You have to admit, it is a pretty strange state around the Mormon strongholds. No where else have I had such an overwhelming feeling of “glad you could visit, time to go now”.
[/quote]

Depends on where you go…middle/south rural Utah on the colorado border…yea, little weird.

Northern Utah…totally (mostly) normal.

87

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

I was waiting for this to be posted. Lol, how many time was it said on here, polygamy is totally different than gay marriage, yada yada yada…
[/quote]

I only said that the gay marriage ruling would spawn other court fights for “equal marriage rights”

Nothing more.[/quote]

I’m just saying it’s funny that many folks were adamant this would not happen.

88

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

They already are. Families with a father in the home are not on public assistance so that wouldn’t be applicable. However, it is common practice among FLS to collect public assistance because the families are not technically wed.

Read “Under the banner of heaven” for a shocking look into FLS. I don’t know how accurate it is because the author certainly seems to have an ax to grind but it is a fascinating book. Same guy that wrote Into thin air, The pat Tillman story and Into the wild.
[/quote]

I own the book, and it is very accurate.

The Elizabeth Smart case consumed this state.[/quote]

You have to admit, it is a pretty strange state around the Mormon strongholds. No where else have I had such an overwhelming feeling of “glad you could visit, time to go now”.
[/quote]

Depends on where you go…middle/south rural Utah on the colorado border…yea, little weird.

Northern Utah…totally (mostly) normal.[/quote]

I have only been to Moab (normal), SLC (weird)and the route between (mixed)

89

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

They already are. Families with a father in the home are not on public assistance so that wouldn’t be applicable. However, it is common practice among FLS to collect public assistance because the families are not technically wed.

Read “Under the banner of heaven” for a shocking look into FLS. I don’t know how accurate it is because the author certainly seems to have an ax to grind but it is a fascinating book. Same guy that wrote Into thin air, The pat Tillman story and Into the wild.
[/quote]

I own the book, and it is very accurate.

The Elizabeth Smart case consumed this state.[/quote]

You have to admit, it is a pretty strange state around the Mormon strongholds. No where else have I had such an overwhelming feeling of “glad you could visit, time to go now”.
[/quote]

Depends on where you go…middle/south rural Utah on the colorado border…yea, little weird.

Northern Utah…totally (mostly) normal.[/quote]

I have only been to Moab (normal), SLC (weird)and the route between (mixed)
[/quote]

SLC is pretty normal and very liberal (mayor, city council, congressman ect.)

Park city could be anyplace in the world.

90

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Let the fun begin!!

Federal Judge strikes down portions of the polygamy law, setting up a higher court battle.

LULZ.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/12/utah-federal-judge-strikes-down.html[/quote]

no lulz, just sad. slippery slope is getting rather slippery.
[/quote]

I can’t wait for people to say “this is no big deal…this is just Utah weirdos” until the law applies nationwide.

How about a family with 6 wives and 30 kids on public assistance?

Lovely.[/quote]

I was waiting for this to be posted. Lol, how many time was it said on here, polygamy is totally different than gay marriage, yada yada yada…
[/quote]

I only said that the gay marriage ruling would spawn other court fights for “equal marriage rights”

Nothing more.[/quote]

I’m just saying it’s funny that many folks were adamant this would not happen. [/quote]

Gotcha, my bad.

91

Before we get our magic underwear in a bunch, the court did not rule that banning Polygamy is unconstitutional. In fact, he says that the states ban on polygamy is permissible. What he found unconstitutional is a Utah law forbidding cohabitation between a married person and someone other than their spouse. The state admitted they only went after Mormon cohabitors, so the judge found the law unconstitutional in practice.

According to the reports I’ve read (I haven’t read the entire ruling) the judge doesn’t even site the USSC case striking down the Defense of Marriage Act. He also states that there is no fundamental right to polygamy.

So, no slippery slope here.

The Utah law in question states: “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person.”

92

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Before we get our magic underwear in a bunch,

[/quote]

MORMON FUNNY PUN!!

93

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Before we get our magic underwear in a bunch, the court did not rule that Polygamy is unconstitutional. In fact, he says that the states ban on polygamy is permissible. What he found unconstitutional is a Utah law forbidding cohabitation between a married person and someone other than their spouse. The state admitted they only went after Mormon cohabitors, so the judge found the law unconstitutional in practice.

According to the reports I’ve read (I haven’t read the entire ruling) the judge doesn’t even site the USSC case striking down the Defense of Marriage Act. He also states that there is no fundamental right to polygamy.

So, no slippery slope here.

The Utah law in question states: “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person.”[/quote]

The lawsuit was filed by the stars of the T.V. show “sister wives” and his lawyer has promised to continue to appeal the law up the chain.

I never said he would win, just that this gave him the impetus to try.

94

Personally I think Polygamy should be legal , The only problem I ever saw was the making of Child brides and running off of the young men . I think that could be addressed and leave Polygamy in tact .

I think it is no one’s business who or how many people you choose to marry . The law should come into it in the case of dividing property in the divorce .

95

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

The thread or argument is not fully evolved yet of course, but it looks like it is going to come up much sooner than I otherwise would have considered likely. Interesting.[/quote]

I don’t recall you needing to apologize and, honestly, I’d rather get one from all the bigoted homosexuals and gay rights activists who called me a homophobe for saying that I favored poly-amory over their oppressive gay-only or straight-only marriage regime.

I can’t wait for hostile marriage takeovers and marriage mergers and acquisitions. Oh, what a time to be a divorce lawyer.

96

[quote]H factor wrote:

Alcohol is a drug and is legal. Therefore heroin will be legal because you can logically argue along the same lines. Well sure you can argue that, but heroin isn’t legal.[/quote]

Not to speak for UtahLama, but that’s not the argument. The argument is;

Alcohol and tobacco are legal so pot should be legal; and once pot is legalized harder drugs will or should soon follow.

Pointing to the top and the bottom and saying they are separate does nothing to disprove the slope between them.

97

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Before we get our magic underwear in a bunch, the court did not rule that Polygamy is unconstitutional. In fact, he says that the states ban on polygamy is permissible. What he found unconstitutional is a Utah law forbidding cohabitation between a married person and someone other than their spouse. The state admitted they only went after Mormon cohabitors, so the judge found the law unconstitutional in practice.

According to the reports I’ve read (I haven’t read the entire ruling) the judge doesn’t even site the USSC case striking down the Defense of Marriage Act. He also states that there is no fundamental right to polygamy.

So, no slippery slope here.

The Utah law in question states: “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person.”[/quote]

You can’t be this dense in real life. If you are, lemme help you:
The men’s shoes you keep finding under the bed that your wife insists she bought for you even though they aren’t the right size… she didn’t pay for them.

Scalia was right, the courts have come down on the stupid side of this culture war.

98
99

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Before we get our magic underwear in a bunch, the court did not rule that Polygamy is unconstitutional. In fact, he says that the states ban on polygamy is permissible. What he found unconstitutional is a Utah law forbidding cohabitation between a married person and someone other than their spouse. The state admitted they only went after Mormon cohabitors, so the judge found the law unconstitutional in practice.

According to the reports I’ve read (I haven’t read the entire ruling) the judge doesn’t even site the USSC case striking down the Defense of Marriage Act. He also states that there is no fundamental right to polygamy.

So, no slippery slope here.

The Utah law in question states: “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person.”[/quote]

Do other states have laws on this? If Utah is just getting its law changed to align with other states then this is a non-issue.

Also, for this to be a slippery slope wouldn’t the state in question first have to legalize gay marriage?

100

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Before we get our magic underwear in a bunch, the court did not rule that Polygamy is unconstitutional. In fact, he says that the states ban on polygamy is permissible. What he found unconstitutional is a Utah law forbidding cohabitation between a married person and someone other than their spouse. The state admitted they only went after Mormon cohabitors, so the judge found the law unconstitutional in practice.

According to the reports I’ve read (I haven’t read the entire ruling) the judge doesn’t even site the USSC case striking down the Defense of Marriage Act. He also states that there is no fundamental right to polygamy.

So, no slippery slope here.

The Utah law in question states: “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person.”[/quote]

You can’t be this dense in real life. If you are, lemme help you:
The men’s shoes you keep finding under the bed that your wife insists she bought for you even though they aren’t the right size… she didn’t pay for them.

Scalia was right, the courts have come down on the stupid side of this culture war.[/quote]

I have no idea what you’re talking about, literally or metaphorically.

The reason article you linked to doesn’t contradict anything I said (although I did go back and edit my first sentence for clarity).

If you have a point to make, please make it.