Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License (1297640) | |
Home > OTChat |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 1 of 2 |
(1297653) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Jul 2 16:51:52 2015, in response to Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 15:41:55 2015. Ayup. Which way do you think it will go, if he's willing to go all the way to the SCOTUS? |
|
(1297692) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 18:11:35 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by 3-9 on Thu Jul 2 16:51:52 2015. Before I would hazard a guess, I would look at the reasoning of the majority in the gay marriage decision. |
|
(1297696) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 18:15:25 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 18:11:35 2015. Which applies to monogamous marriage contracts. |
|
(1297705) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 19:08:06 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 18:15:25 2015. To me, that's the most obvious point. People miss that gays were essentially asking to become part of the structure of traditional marriage.But I'm not sure people will see the fundamental qualitatiive difference between a non-conventional marriage and plural marriage. To some people it would just be more "tolerence." We're becoming a "Why Not?" culture. |
|
(1297715) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jul 2 19:49:34 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 19:08:06 2015. The line will be drawn where it is now. |
|
(1297723) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 20:15:29 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by italianstallion on Thu Jul 2 19:49:34 2015. As it should be. There are statutes against bigamy on state and Federal levels. |
|
(1297728) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 20:35:46 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 20:15:29 2015. I looked for an argument in Justice Kennedy's opinion for the Court that would delineate an essential argument why homosexual monogamous marriage is a Constitutional Right but plural marriage isn't and didn't find it.The essential argument of how plural marriage is heading into was expressed by CJ Roberts in his dissent. This is what opponents of plural marriage will have to do to successfully argue against in light of Obergefell. "One immediate question invited by the majority’s position is whether States may retain the definition of marriage as a union of two people. Cf. Brown v. Buhman, 947 F. Supp. 2d 1170 (Utah 2013), appeal pending, No. 144117 (CA10). Although the majority randomly inserts the adjective “two” in various places, it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not. Indeed, from the standpoint of history and tradition, a leap from opposite-sex marriage to same-sex marriage is much greater than one from a two-person union to plural unions, which have deep roots in some cultures around the world. If the majority is willing to take the big leap, it is hard to see how it can say no to the shorter one. |
|
(1297731) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by RockParkMan on Thu Jul 2 20:38:22 2015, in response to Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 15:41:55 2015. Mormon dirtbags. |
|
(1297736) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 20:50:01 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 20:35:46 2015. What you are missing is that since Bush v Gore, the Court has stopped finding good legal reasons for its decisions. Both the liberal and conservative wings are guilty. They decide what they want the answer to be and then they work out some reasoning.The Court knows the public doesn't support polygamous marriages. So they'll figure out a way to not allow them. |
|
(1297757) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 21:36:41 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 20:50:01 2015. Existing law will do just fine. |
|
(1297760) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 21:47:41 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 21:36:41 2015. I'm talking about how the courts will uphold existing law. |
|
(1297956) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by kew gardens teleport on Sat Jul 4 05:57:41 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 20:50:01 2015. What you are missing is that since Bush v Gore, the Court has stopped finding good legal reasons for its decisions.I'm sure the Supreme Court made politically convenient decisions based on poor legal reasoning way before that. It's the difficulty they've wandered into by treating their own precedent as a rebuttable presumption, rather than as binding. |
|
(1297958) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jul 4 07:27:42 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by kew gardens teleport on Sat Jul 4 05:57:41 2015. Agreed.I'm thinking of something like the Arizona case that says a referendum is legally valid even in a murky case. What will happen next time when the referendum supports a conservative cause? You may see a flip of many of the 9 votes, and the reasoning will be very twisted. |
|
(1298230) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:07:22 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 18:11:35 2015. I doubt reason will play a major part in it. |
|
(1298232) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:12:41 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 19:08:06 2015. To me, that's the most obvious point. People miss that gays were essentially asking to become part of the structure of traditional marriage.But I'm not sure people will see the fundamental qualitatiive difference between a non-conventional marriage and plural marriage. To some people it would just be more "tolerence." Except that traditional marriage was polygamous. More recent tradition held that marriage was monogamous but open— you could have one spouse but you could also have any number of affairs (at least if you were male). The notion of one-man-one-woman-fidelity-for-life is a very recent invention, and is only a "tradition" in the sense that anything commonplace when the baby boomers were growing up is now an American Tradition® the loss of which is Destroying Society™ forever. We're becoming a "Why Not?" culture. If it doesn't hurt anyone, then why not? That's exactly the culture we need to be. |
|
(1298234) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:15:23 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 21:36:41 2015. Except that existing law is discriminatory against people who want to get married as a group.Why does the basic logic about marriage being a private decision between consenting adults suddenly go out the window when more than two adults are involved? |
|
(1298241) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 09:50:41 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:15:23 2015. Problem here is that it gets real complicated once kids are involved. |
|
(1298264) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Jul 5 14:17:53 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:12:41 2015. If it doesn't hurt anyone, then why not?That approach lends itself to individualism, instrumentalism, and selfism, all illogical philosophies. These philosophies end up propagated and we and our children become enslaved by them. Any so-called happiness (really, "pleasure") that is reached is fragile and shallow because it has no logical foundation. |
|
(1298270) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Jul 5 14:40:26 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Jul 5 14:17:53 2015. Because you say so? Why is happiness shallow if it has no logical foundation? And how are those philosophies illogical? |
|
(1298273) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Jul 5 15:02:43 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:12:41 2015. How do you decide what hurts someone? Does a man pulling his pants down and masturbating on the subway hurt anyone? |
|
(1298277) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 5 15:25:01 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Easy on Sun Jul 5 15:02:43 2015. thats nasty easyi would get off and ride the next car |
|
(1298279) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Sun Jul 5 15:55:04 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 05:12:41 2015. Excellent post. |
|
(1298361) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:43:45 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Jul 5 14:17:53 2015. Then why are you on a railfan forum? There's no "logical reason" why any of us should find railfanning fun yet we enjoy it anyway.If you think harmless actions should be restricted, then which actions and why? Dubious claims that society will be Ruined Forever® by a nonexistent slippery slope aren't really sufficient. |
|
(1298364) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:47:30 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Easy on Sun Jul 5 15:02:43 2015. Who is the victim? How are they hurt? If you can't think of any meaningful answer to these questions or even begin to take a guess, then maybe the action should be legal.In the case of your subway masturbator, the primary victim is the woman he is doubtless sexually harassing. The secondary victims are anyone who will have to ride in that car after it's been contaminated by his "physical evidence." However, in the case of three people who want to get married, there is no victim. |
|
(1298365) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 5 19:49:43 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:47:30 2015. iawtp |
|
(1298366) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:50:05 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 09:50:41 2015. How so? The basic concept of raising children in a family remains more or less the same regardless of the total number of parents— if adding, say, a live-in nanny or an elderly grandmother to the household doesn't hurt the kids, I fail to see how adding a stepmother or a second father or whatever term they choose would cause any damage. |
|
(1298371) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 20:11:18 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:50:05 2015. Problems arise with parental responsibilities. You can't have a parent that isn't an actual parent making decisions for a child. This brings about too much opportunity for conflict, as each "wife" attempts to gain the most of the available resources for their natural child(ren).There's also the well documented abuse of children in polygamous homes, do we really need to replay all that again? And before anyone brings up Islam, yes there is some polygamy however it's limited on a basis of wealth as each wife/family has to be maintained in their own home at an economically equal level to any other. This also ensures a non parent would not be speaking for a child. Multiple wives rarely if ever meet. Often these families are in different cities if not countries. |
|
(1298411) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 20:28:00 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 09:50:41 2015. I think it'll be even more interesting if women have multiple husbands. |
|
(1298416) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 5 20:35:09 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 20:28:00 2015. I think THAT'S where they'll draw that line. :) |
|
(1298417) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 20:41:04 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 5 20:35:09 2015. That's right. This is all about controlling women. |
|
(1298420) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 20:49:15 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 20:11:18 2015. Problems arise with parental responsibilities. You can't have a parent that isn't an actual parent making decisions for a child.So no foster homes? Adoptions? Step-parents? Children raised by aunts, uncles, or grandparents? This brings about too much opportunity for conflict, as each "wife" attempts to gain the most of the available resources for their natural child(ren). Obviously, this is a purely hypothetical scenario with no meaningful basis in fact, so I'll just point out the odd assumption of one-man-several-woman and inquire as to the nature of a household with one wife and two husbands, neither of which are certain which children are biologically theirs. There's also the well documented abuse of children in polygamous homes, do we really need to replay all that again? And the well-documented abuse of children raised by two parents. And one parent. And no parents. If any kids are more likely to be abused, it's probably the ones with no parents (foster or otherwise). |
|
(1298430) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sun Jul 5 21:17:32 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 20:41:04 2015. Maybe, but I think any (legal) body who tries to block a woman from having more than one husband is going to have the courts on them so fast they won't be able to backpedal without falling on their ass.I can envision one extreme possibility if this passes: that "marrying" will be the next step beyond "friending" in social networking, complete with pre-nup templates (not unlike software's "terms and conditions") to dissuade gold-diggers (male and female). It may become a status symbol to be married to dozens, if not hundreds, of people all over the world. |
|
(1298431) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 21:27:27 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 20:49:15 2015. There are strict rules and supervision for foster parents. Adoptive parents are parents. Relatives raising children are generally a consensual agreement with the parent.The scenario isn't as hypothetical as you may think. |
|
(1298439) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Easy on Sun Jul 5 21:47:24 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:47:30 2015. Perhaps the only difference between someone masturbating and someone sneezing is in your mind. Who says there has to be an obvious victim? Maybe he's watching porn on a tablet? Then what? |
|
(1298441) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Sun Jul 5 21:54:27 2015, in response to Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by SLRT on Thu Jul 2 15:41:55 2015. Equality is a slippery slope. Pretty soon, everyone is going to clamor for equality, including practitioners of bestiality and members of NAMBLA. |
|
(1298443) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Jul 5 21:55:26 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Easy on Sun Jul 5 21:47:24 2015. In NYC, you're supposed to share. :) |
|
(1298444) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 5 22:02:45 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Mitch45 on Sun Jul 5 21:54:27 2015. iawtp |
|
(1298453) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Fwt9000 on Sun Jul 5 23:08:43 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Sun Jul 5 19:47:30 2015. Awesome post! |
|
(1298454) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Fwt9000 on Sun Jul 5 23:11:58 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 20:11:18 2015. Why does a polygamous marriage have to be one man with multiple women? What if two bi men want to marry each other AND a woman? |
|
(1298455) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by The Silence on Sun Jul 5 23:24:50 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 20:41:04 2015. OK, genius, who's controlling who here?They exist, they're raising children, and yet in your mind they are somehow lesser people? If I took your words in this thread, replaced the words related to polygamy with words related to homosexuality, and then showed it to someone else, they'd probably call you a homophobe. Actually that is quite descriptive of many left leaning people I know. |
|
(1298462) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 6 00:03:47 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by bingbong on Sun Jul 5 21:27:27 2015. Adoptive parents are parents.And presumably step-parents are too in the event of divorce and remarriage. People who aren't biological parents can fill parental roles and do all the time— why does it suddenly become an issue if they're part of a polygamous marriage? The scenario isn't as hypothetical as you may think. I'm not saying it can never happen, but it's not a legitimate concern overall— two people married and raising their own biological children can and do molest said children, but such abuse does not occur with significant frequency nor does it occur because of their marriage, so to claim such marriages should be abolished is absurd. |
|
(1298466) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 6 00:11:22 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Easy on Sun Jul 5 21:47:24 2015. Perhaps the only difference between someone masturbating and someone sneezing is in your mind.Nope. Masturbation is quite definitively a voluntary act. Sneezing is not— people have no control over it. Who says there has to be an obvious victim? The victim doesn't have to be "obvious." The victim merely has to exist in some capacity. Maybe he's watching porn on a tablet? Then what? Subway masturbation is basically always a form of sexual harassment. In any case, the secondary victims are victims too. And in your example, anyone obliged to see or hear the porn against their will would also be a victim. |
|
(1298471) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 6 00:23:07 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Mitch45 on Sun Jul 5 21:54:27 2015. Pretty soon, everyone is going to clamor for equality, including practitioners of bestiality and members of NAMBLA.Do yourself a favour— research the concept of "consent" and how it might be relevant when things like marriage are concerned. |
|
(1298478) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by The Silence on Mon Jul 6 00:55:38 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Mitch45 on Sun Jul 5 21:54:27 2015. what's wrong with society that Marlin Brando look-a-likes can't get married? |
|
(1298484) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jul 6 06:10:24 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Mitch45 on Sun Jul 5 21:54:27 2015. Wrong. Those are already addressed in law. Same with bigamy/polagamy. |
|
(1298485) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jul 6 06:23:52 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by The Silence on Sun Jul 5 23:24:50 2015. Kitten, Brynn and Doll had to work with the legalities of the state to get married to each other. As being married to more than one person is not currently legal, they had to combine handfasting, legally binding documents and legal marriage.A family lawyer drew up paperwork - in terms of assets, wills and legal rights to children - to bind them all together as much as they could without an actual three way marriage. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2611020/Meet-worlds-married-lesbian-threesome-baby-make-four-July.html#ixzz3f6bVMRz7 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook This is a contract. Not a legal marriage. Even they recognize it. |
|
(1298491) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Jul 6 08:30:08 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Nilet on Mon Jul 6 00:23:07 2015. Do YOURSELf a favor and read up on the legal notion of implied consent and consent that can be determined by means other than say-so by the parties. |
|
(1298494) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jul 6 08:39:14 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Mitch45 on Mon Jul 6 08:30:08 2015. Animals and children are incapable of consent, implied or otherwise. |
|
(1298507) | |
Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License |
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Mon Jul 6 10:53:56 2015, in response to Re: Polygamous Montana Trio File for Wedding License, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jul 6 08:39:14 2015. That's what you say now. Gay marriage was unthinkable 50 years ago. |
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |