I won't say we told you so, but...

[Taxman]

An AP report is out about how a Utah polygamist is trying to use the recent Supreme Court decision on sodomy. Slippery slope anyone?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

[ShainaT]

SALT LAKE CITY -- A lawyer for a Utah man with five wives argued Monday that his bigamy convictions should be thrown out following a Supreme Court decision decriminalizing gay sex.

The nation's high court in June struck down a Texas sodomy law, ruling that what gay men and women do in the privacy of their homes is no business of government.

It's no different for polygamists, argued Tom Green's attorney, John Bucher, to the Utah Supreme Court.

"It doesn't bother anyone, (and with) no compelling state interest in what you do in your own home with consenting adults, you should be allowed to do so," Bucher said.

*****************************************************
All this stuff is going to come to a head and soon.
So, basically I could either marry a man, marry a woman or marry several people at the same time? What if I want to marry a 12 year old girl? Geez.

[monkee]

Originally Posted by Taxman

An AP report is out about how a Utah polygamist is trying to use the recent Supreme Court decision on sodomy. Slippery slope anyone?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

Not surprising. Like Shaina says, who's next? It's just going to get more and more ridiculous.

[angusmcgee]

what about your dog? Cat? The sky is the limit.

[monkee]

Originally Posted by angusmcgee

what about your dog? Cat? The sky is the limit.

Brother? Sister? Mom, Dad? Whatever. As long as you're not "hurting" anyone, what's the big deal, right?

[angusmcgee]

Originally Posted by monkee

Brother? Sister? Mom, Dad? Whatever. As long as you're not "hurting" anyone, what's the big deal, right?

shewt, monkee.. That already happens in Arkeenshaw!!



The state where the citizens' family tree looks like a telephone pole!

[CagedTroll]

Let's just look at the whole article, please. One of his wives was 13 years old!!! He was also convicted of "criminal nonsupport of his 30 children".

And let's examine the Supreme Court decision his lawyer is trying to cite. It's a law prohibiting a sexual activity between consenting adults that's been found unconstitutional, since it's in violation of a right to privacy. NOT laws prohibiting sex between an adult and a 13-year-old OR allowing thirty kids to suffer a diaper and similac shortage. "Privacy" wouldn't cover that any more than murder in the "privacy" of his home.

This isn't a "slippery slope." This is a slimy lawyer and scummy child molester. And both of them, desperate. Even if the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of the Texas Anti-Sodomy laws (and for that matter, even if that case had NEVER come up) these two clowns would still be arguing (in court) that bigamy, raping children, and child abandonment are a man's God-given rights. In a year they would have been before the Supremes claiming that laws against these activities were unconstitutional.

"I told you so..."?!? If Santorum had said that people were stupid, I'd say "Yeah he did..., I'm sorry I didn't listen." But that's not what he said. And just because some idiot is using Santorum's argument in court doesn't make Santorum right.

[Taxman]

That's not the point. The point is that (as many social conservatives have been saying) as soon as one formally taboo behavior becomes condoned, the rest creep closer to becoming accepted. Yes, he's a sick bastard and his lawyer should be shot or that as it stands now that he doesn't have a snowballs chance in **** of succeeding. None of that changes the fact that we saw this coming and were scoffed at.

[CagedTroll]

That's an oversimplification of the point. Conservatives were scoffed at because it was an oversimplification. And a politically motivated one to boot. Had the issue been addressed in its complexity and nuance, there wouldn't have been scoffing. There would have been discourse.

I'm ready to make a(n) (inaccurate) prediction now:
Sometime within the next two generations (that's about 70 years) the legal age of consent will be lowered to 16 years of age. The reasoning as it will be cited in court will be based around the "I Love Lucy"-ish popularity of "Seinfeld" in syndication. That, and 50 years of increasing numbers of 14-year-olds petitioning the courts for "emancipation" from their parents. Also to be factored in will be the number of parents that freely give their consent for their juvenile daughter to marry everytime she gets knocked up by a multi-millionaire 50-year-old congressman or senator or actor.

In 70 years what will not be a factor is homosexual civil unions or even interracial couplings (also once thought to be the harbinger of the downfall of western civilization) because in 70 years (hopefully) society will have adjusted to these sorts of "perversions".

And all of that will be someone else's problem, since most of us will be dead in 70 years. We'll roll in our graves, I'm sure. Just as our grandparents and great-grandparents are rolling because of our tolerance of interracial dating today. It ain't our problem though. It's something for our kids to work out with whatever values we manage to pass on to them that stand the test of time. Or else it's us creating problems for them. The catastrophe of the state's recognizing interracial marriages is only about 30 years old, and it's still creating problems today.

But "jailbait" has been "jailbait" for longer than I've been alive. That's part of the reason Charlie Chaplin is still famous; he's still an outlaw.

[Taxman]

Ah, quit yer posturing Troll. We all know your a big cream puff

Since when did any conservative you know say that inter-racial dating was going to be the downfall of Western Civ? My hackles are a bit raised because I know that you know that I'm no bigot. We've had this conversation before.

lol BTW at your scrying...

[CagedTroll]

Originally Posted by Taxman

Since when did any conservative you know say that inter-racial dating was going to be the downfall of Western Civ?

Ummm... My grandpappy? The day he found out I was coming into this world. No wait, that would be the FIRST conservative I've known to say that! You still want the most recent...? LOL

(Sorry, but the setup was irresistible!)

I don't think you're a bigot T-Man, but I've got relatives on both sides of the ethnic divide that still think intermarriage is evil. (I think I've mentioned before that I hate these people.) Up until around 1970 the issue was getting debated with the same "slippery slope" argument by politicians. And (this is funny) the South Carolina state constitution just [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] on inter-racial marriage in 1998.

[Taxman]

lol Ok... But conservative doesn't equal bigot or racist. Anyone who thinks the way those relatives of yours do is not just wrong, but stupidly wrong...

Sure, the slippery slope argument was used by some people in the inter-racial marriage debate. That doesn't make the concept wrong. There's a huge difference between two people of opposite sexes with different skin tones getting married and two people with the same "equipment" doing so. Besides, (and here's where good 'ol Taxman starts to sound like a broken record ) it should be up to the individual states on all these issues. Do I detest abortion and wish that it was illegal? Sure, but not if some court decides that it should be or Congress passes a bill. Ditto for racism, homosexual marriage, ect. I'm a States-rights guy through and through...

[bradedit]

You should come to the south Taxman, with bunches of conservatives, inter-racial marriage was(and is) a big taboo, so was marrying outside of your religion. What about living with one another before marriage, or sex before marriage,these were all supposed to be the downfall of us.

So what do you do in your bedroom? Do I really care, nope!

[Taxman]

Originally Posted by bradedit

You should come to the south Taxman, with bunches of conservatives, inter-racial marriage was(and is) a big taboo, so was marrying outside of your religion. What about living with one another before marriage, or sex before marriage,these were all supposed to be the downfall of us.

So what do you do in your bedroom? Do I really care, nope!

Heck, you can come out here to the West and see a bunch of “liberal” members of the Yavapai-Apache Nation who think the same thing! Bigotry and racism infects members of every race and political affiliation equally.

Now, I really could care less what two (or more) people (or… well, I won’t go there ) do in the bedroom. However, I don’t want the state telling me to smile and nod about it either. My point is that the Federal gov’t (and the states too, for that matter) have limitations on what they’re allowed to do and those limitations are being bent if not broken. The Constitution is not a “living document”, it’s a legal document. As such, its words have distinct, exact meanings.

[bradedit]

Does it say in the constitution who you should have sex with?? Do you really approve of all the laws that your state has? I doubt any of us know all of the laws, some of them are just plain stupid(who made them up anyway)


Arizona Crazy Law
You may not have more than two dildos in a house.


Any misdemeanor committed while wearing a red mask is considered a felony. This goes back in the days of the Wild West.

Looking for more dumb laws? Check out DumbLaws.com!
There is a possible 25 years in prison for cutting down a cactus.


When being attacked by a criminal or burglar, you may only protect yourself with the same weapon that the other person posseses.


Hunting camels is prohibited.


Donkeys cannot sleep in bathtubs.


It is unlawful to refuse a person a glass of water.


Glendale
Cars may not be driven in reverse.


Globe
Cards may not be played in the street with a Native American.


Hayden
If you bother the cottontails or bullfrogs, you will be fined.


Maricopa County
No more than six girls may live in any house.


Mesa
It is illegal to smoke cigarettes within 15 feet of a public place unless you have a Class 12 liqueur license.


Mohave County
A decree declares that anyone caught stealing soap must wash himself with it until it is all used up.


Nogales
An ordinance prohibits the wearing of suspenders.


Prescott
No one is permitted to ride their horse up the stairs of the county court house.


Tucson
Women may not wear pants.


Tombstone
It is illegal for men and women over the age of 18 to have less than one missing tooth visible when smiling.