RSS

Polygamy is next: Montana throuple applies for wedding license

03 Jul

Yep.

Once again, the slippery slope is real.

Even if this doesn’t happen now, it will come.

WINTERY KNIGHT

Marriage and family Marriage and family

The Supreme Court redefined marriage so that it no longer means one man, one woman, for life. What follows from attaching the word “marriage” to people who have temporary feelings of love for other people?

Here’s the story from MSN.com.

Excerpt:

A Montana man said Wednesday that he was inspired by last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage to apply for a marriage license so that he can legally wed his second wife.

Nathan Collier and his wives Victoria and Christine applied at the Yellowstone County Courthouse in Billings on Tuesday in an attempt to legitimize their polygamous marriage. Montana, like all 50 states, outlaws bigamy — holding multiple marriage licenses — but Collier said he plans to sue if the application is denied.

“It’s about marriage equality,” Collier told The Associated Press Wednesday. “You can’t have this without polygamy.”

[…]The Supreme Court’s ruling on…

View original post 829 more words

Advertisements
 
10 Comments

Posted by on July 3, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

10 responses to “Polygamy is next: Montana throuple applies for wedding license

  1. Eric

    July 5, 2015 at 6:38 am

    Utah was for many years denied statehood until it legally abolished polygamy. Now states might be punished for not recognizing it.

     
  2. Will S.

    July 5, 2015 at 10:51 am

    The irony, eh?

     
  3. feeriker

    July 6, 2015 at 2:47 am

    Utah was for many years denied statehood until it legally abolished polygamy. Now states might be punished for not recognizing it.

    I always wondered why the hell Utah ever wanted statehood in the first place. If my understanding of Mormon history is correct (not a sure thing by any means), weren’t Utahans striving to become an independent Mormon republic?

     
  4. Will S.

    July 6, 2015 at 10:36 am

    I thought so, too. But they probably realized America wouldn’t allow that, and so decided to capitulate, instead. But the Union wouldn’t even accept their proposed ‘State of Deseret’…

    Too bad; it would have been better, IMO, for them to have had that republic, and kept polygamy, and thus likely have largely remained confined to their landlocked desert region, and most likely not have had as much success in proselytizing others to join them, if they’d kept polygamy and their weird racial beliefs (that dark skin is a result of sinfulness, etc.)

     
  5. feeriker

    July 6, 2015 at 11:02 am

    Too bad; it would have been better, IMO, for them to have had that republic, and kept polygamy, and thus likely have largely remained confined to their landlocked desert region, and most likely not have had as much success in proselytizing others to join them, if they’d kept polygamy and their weird racial beliefs (that dark skin is a result of sinfulness, etc.)

    Exactly. As odious as I find their theology and customs, I would have at least a modicum of respect for the Mormons had they stuck fast to their guns, told the Feds to GFT, and fought it out to the bitter end. After all, isn’t a key point of a religious faith to defend that faith to the death (and be assured of a place in the celestial kingdom)?

    Instead, Utahans today are now among the staunchest of Washington worshipers (BYU is a prime recruiting ground for the FBI and the military academies). Any “religion” that surrenders a key tenet of its faith in order to curry temporal political favor is a relgion that deserves extinction. Ironically, this means that I have more respect for the breakaway fundamentalist Mormon groups, however awful they are, than I do for the established mainstream LDS church, which is as much a hollow churchian shell as are most Christian denominations today. Howver despicable the theology and practices of the Mormon fundamentalists, at least they haven’t capitulated to Caesar.

     
  6. Eric

    July 7, 2015 at 5:59 am

    There was an insurrection in Utah in 1858, declaring for the Deseret Republic. Ironically, a future Confederate general named Albert Sidney Johnston was sent to put it down. It turned out be kind of a bluff on the Mormons’ part—they mostly disbanded the militias before Johnston got there although a few dozen Mormons were killed in various skirmishes. Brigham Young was forced to resign as governor and some of the concessions Utah made were part of a general amnesty offered by President Buchanan.

     
  7. Will S.

    July 7, 2015 at 12:38 pm

    Ah.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s