View Single Post
Old 08-05-10, 02:42 PM   #12
frau kaleun
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Skyri--oh who are we kidding, I'm probably at Lowe's. Again.
Posts: 12,706
Downloads: 168
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by August View Post
If that is unconstitutional, and it very well may be, then i'd think the laws against polygamy should be unconstitutional as well right?
I don't know the exact wording of those laws, but if they specify that marriage can only exist between two individuals, and no more than that number, then they are addressing the number of spouses one person can have and not which two people can marry each other where only two people are involved to begin with.

If they bring sex into the issue by stating that a man cannot be married to more than one woman at a time, well, nothing's changed there. A man still can't be married to more than one woman at a time. (He can't be married to more than one man at a time either.) As long as the law doesn't specify that marrying a woman is his only option for wedded bliss, it shouldn't be affected by this judge's ruling.
frau kaleun is offline   Reply With Quote